Voters’ wrath? Policy change and government popularity

[thumbnail of Voters wrath Governance RR2.pdf]
Preview
Text - Accepted Version
· Please see our End User Agreement before downloading.
| Preview

Please see our End User Agreement.

It is advisable to refer to the publisher's version if you intend to cite from this work. See Guidance on citing.

Add to AnyAdd to TwitterAdd to FacebookAdd to LinkedinAdd to PinterestAdd to Email

Arndt, C., Jensen, C. and Wenzelburger, G. (2021) Voters’ wrath? Policy change and government popularity. Governance, 34 (1). pp. 147-169. ISSN 1468-0491 doi: 10.1111/gove.12483

Abstract/Summary

Recent research suggests that voters are bad at responding in a meaningful way to policy events when deciding for whom to vote. Voters rely on so-called ”blind retrospection,” punishing governments for events outside politicians’ control. However, another core aspect of the blind retrospection perspective has not been put to the test: are voters unable to respond to policy decisions that clearly are under the politicians’ control? We construct a unique large-N dataset on legislative changes in German old age pensions and unemployment protection to see if cutbacks and expansions lead to lower/higher support for the government. Our data are exceptionally fine-grained and allow us to track the policy-vote link for 416 months from 1977 to 2013 with a total of 329,167 respondents. We find substantial support for the notion that voters react in a meaningful way to policy changes, but also that they can be distracted by high-profile, extreme events.

Altmetric Badge

Item Type Article
URI https://reading-clone.eprints-hosting.org/id/eprint/88837
Identification Number/DOI 10.1111/gove.12483
Refereed Yes
Divisions Arts, Humanities and Social Science > School of Politics, Economics and International Relations > Politics and International Relations
Publisher Wiley
Download/View statistics View download statistics for this item

Downloads

Downloads per month over past year

University Staff: Request a correction | Centaur Editors: Update this record

Search Google Scholar