Hostname: page-component-7dd5485656-k8lnt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-10-31T16:38:35.463Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Partisan Bias in Blame Attribution: When Does it Occur?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 January 2015

Andrew Healy ,
Alexander G. Kuo  and
Neil Malhotra
Andrew Healy
Affiliation:
Associate Professor, Department of Economics, Loyola Marymount University, Los Angeles, CA, USA
Alexander G. Kuo
Affiliation:
Assistant Professor, Department of Government, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, USA
Neil Malhotra
Affiliation:
Professor, Graduate School of Business, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA; e-mail: neilm@stanford.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

How do citizens attribute blame in the wake of government failure? Does partisanship bias these attributions? While partisan cues may serve as useful guides when citizens are evaluating public policies, those cues are likely to be less informative and more distortionary when evaluating government performance regarding a crisis. We address these questions by examining blame attributions to government appointees for the 9/11 terrorist attacks. We implement an experimental design in a nationally representative survey that builds on previous work in two ways: (1) we manipulate party labels for the same officials in a real-world setting by considering appointees who were nominated at different times by presidents of different parties; and (2) we examine how domain relevance moderates partisan bias. We find that partisan bias in attributions is strongest when officials are domain relevant, a finding that has troubling implications for representative democracy.

Keywords

Survey experimentblame attributionpartisan biasmotivated reasoningretrospective votingpublic opinion

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Experimental Political Science , Volume 1 , Issue 2 , Winter 2014 , pp. 144 - 158
Copyright
Copyright © The Experimental Research Section of the American Political Science Association 2015 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Bartels, L. M. 2002. Beyond the Running Tally: Partisan Bias in Political Perceptions. Political Behavior 24 (2): 117–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berinsky, A. J. 2007. Assuming the Costs of War: Events, Elites, and the American Public Support for Military Conflict. Journal of Politics 69 (4): 957–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, A. R. 2010. Are Governors Responsible for the State Economy? Partisanship, Blame, and Divided Federalism. Journal of Politics 72 (3): 605–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bullock, J. G. 2011. Elite Influence on Public Opinion in an Informed Electorate. American Political Science Review 105 (3): 496–515.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Citrin, J. 1974. The Political Relevance of Trust in Government. American Political Science Review 68 (3): 973–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cook, T. E., and Gronke, P. 2005. The Skeptical American: Revisiting the Meanings of Trust in Government and Confidence in Institutions. Journal of Politics 67 (3): 784–803.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fearon, J. D. 1999. Electoral Accountability and the Control of Politicians: Selecting Good Types Versus Sanctioning Poor Performance. In Democracy, Accountability, and Representation eds. Przeworksi, A., Stokes, S. C., and Manin, B.. New York: Cambridge University Press, 55–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Feldmann, L. 2013. Obama Approval Ratings Sinks: A Self-Inflicted Wound. Christian Science Monitor. http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/2013/1101/Obama-approval-rating-sinks-a-self-inflicted-wound (Accessed December 12, 2013).Google Scholar
Ferejohn, J. 1986. Incumbent Performance and Electoral Control. Public Choice 50 (1–3): 5–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fletcher, M. A. and Morin, R. 2005. Bush’s Approval Rating Drops to New Low in Wake of Storm. Washington Post. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/09/12/AR2005091200668.html (Accessed December 12, 2013).Google Scholar
Fiorina, M. P. 1981. Retrospective Voting in American National Elections. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Gaines, B. J., Kuklinski, J. H., and Quirk, P. J. 2007. The Logic of the Survey Experiment Reexamined. Political Analysis 15 (1): 1–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gasper, J. T., and Reeves, A. 2011. Make It Rain? Retrospection and the Attentive Electorate in the Context of Natural Disasters. American Journal of Political Science 55 (2): 340–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gershkoff, A., and Kushner, S. 2005. Shaping Public Opinion: The 9/11–Iraq Connection in the Bush Administration’s Rhetoric. Perspectives on Politics 3 (3): 525–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Healy, A., and Lenz, G. 2014. Substituting the End for the Whole: Why Voters Respond Primarily to the Election-Year Economy. American Journal of Political Science 58 (1): 31–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Healy, A., and Malhotra, N. 2013. Retrospective Voting Reconsidered. Annual Review of Political Science 16: 285–306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hetherington, M. J., and Nelson, M. 2003. Anatomy of A Rally Effect: George W. Bush and the War on Terrorism. PS: Political Science and Politics 36 (1): 37–42.Google Scholar
Hobolt, S. B., Tilley, J., and Wittrock, J. 2013. Listening to the Government: How Information Shapes Responsibility Attributions. Political Behavior 35 (1): 153–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huber, G. A., Hill, S. J., and Lenz, G. S. 2012. Sources of Bias in Retrospective Decision Making: Experimental Evidence on Voters’ Limitations in Controlling Incumbents. American Political Science Review 106 (4): 720–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jackman, S., and Sniderman, P. M. 2002. Institutional Organization of Choice Spaces: A Political Conception of Political Psychology. In Political Psychology eds. Monroe, K. R.. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 209–25.Google Scholar
Key, V. O. 1966. The Responsible Electorate: Rationality in Presidential Voting, 1936–1960. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kramer, G. H. 1971. Short-Term Fluctuations in US Voting Behavior, 1896–1964. American Political Science Review 65 (1): 131–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levendusky, M. S., and Horowitz, M. C. 2012. When Backing Down is the Right Decision: Partisanship, New Information, and Audience Costs. Journal of Politics 74 (2): 323–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lupia, A., and McCubbins, M. D. 1998. The Democratic Dilemma: Can Citizens Learn What They Need to Know? Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Maestas, C. D., Atkenson, L. R., Croom, T., and Bryant, L. A. 2008. Shifting the Blame: Federalism, Media, and Public Assignment of Blame Following Hurricane Katrina. Publius: The Journal of Federalism 38 (4): 609–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Malhotra, N., and Kuo, A. G. 2008. Attributing Blame: The Public’s Response to Hurricane Katrina. Journal of Politics 70 (1): 120–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marsh, M., and Tilley, J. 2010. The Attribution of Credit and Blame to Governments and Its Impact on Vote Choice. British Journal of Political Science 40 (1): 115–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Petrocik, J. R. 1996. Issue Ownership in Presidential Elections, With a 1980 Case Study. American Journal of Political Science 40 (3): 825–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Popkin, S. L. 1994. The Reasoning Voter: Communication and Persuasion in Presidential Campaigns. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Rudolph, T. J. 2003a. Institutional Context and the Assignment of Political Responsibility. Journal of Politics 65 (1): 190–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rudolph, T. J. 2003b. Who’s Responsible for the Economy? The Formation and Consequences of Responsibility Attributions. American Journal of Political Science 47 (4): 698–713.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rudolph, T. J. 2006. Triangulating Political Responsibility: The Motivated Formation of Responsibility Judgments. Political Psychology 27 (1): 99–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rudolph, T. J., and Grant, J. T. 2002. An Attributional Model of Economic Voting: Evidence from the 2000 Presidential Election. Political Research Quarterly 55 (4): 805–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taber, C. S., and Lodge, M. 2006. Motivated Skepticism in Political Information Processing. American Journal of Political Science 50 (3): 755–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taylor, D. M., and Doria, J. R. 1981. Self-Serving and Group-Serving Bias in Attribution. The Journal of Social Psychology 113 (2): 201–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tilley, J. R., and Hobolt, S. B. 2011. Is the Government to Blame? An Experimental Test of How Partisanship Shapes Perceptions of Performance and Responsibility. Journal of Politics 73 (2): 316–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tucker, J. A., and Brader, T. 2012. Follow the Leader: Party Cues, Policy Opinion, and the Power of Partisanship in Three Multiparty Systems. Comparative Politics 44 (4): 403–20.Google Scholar
Zegart, A. B. 2007. Spying Blind: The CIA, the FBI, and the Origins of 9/11. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar