Abstract
The general mechanisms which underlie the psychological phenomenon ofpersonalizing (“cognitive simplification” and “defensive attribution”) would seem to have great utility in explaining attributions of presidential control over the economy. Yet previous research has generated inconsistent and inconclusive empirical results. This study identifies several sources of inconsistency and then attempts to clarify the approach by focusing separately on the “object” and the “subject” of personalizing. Our findings suggest that the determinants of personalizing to “the president” are different from the factors that explain personalizing to the incumbent. In addition, we find that the impact of the two psychological mechanisms differs substantially within economic subject areas.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Brickman, Philip, Rabinowitz, Vita C., Karuza, Jr., Jurgis, Coates, Dan, Cohn, Ellen, and Kidder, Louise (1982). Models of helping and coping.American Psychologist 37:368–384.
Brown, Thad, and Stein, Arthur (1982). The political economy of national elections.Comparative Politics 14:479–497.
Citrin, Jack (1974). The political relevance of trust in government.American Political Science Review 68:973–988.
Downs, Anthony (1957).An Economic Theory of Democracy. New York: Harper & Row.
Edwards, George C., III (1983).The Public Presidency: The Pursuit of Popular Support. New York: St. Martin's Press.
Eisenbeis, Robert A., and Avery, Robert B. (1972).Discriminant Analysis and Classification Procedures. Lexington, Mass.: Lexington Books.
Fincham, Frank D., and Jaspars, Joseph M. (1980). Attribution of responsibility: From man the scientist to man as lawyer. In Leonard Berkowitz (ed.),Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, vol. 13, pp. 82–139. New York: Academic Press.
Greenstein, Fred I. (1965). Popular images of the President.American Journal of Psychiatry 122:523–529.
Greenstein, Fred I. (1974). What the president means to Americans: Presidential “choice” between elections. In James D. Barber (ed.),Choosing the President, pp. 121–147. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall.
Handberg, Roger, and Maddox, William S. (1978). Evaluation of presidents: Item format as an interactive effect.GPSA Journal 6:87–92.
Heider, Fritz (1958).The Psychology of Interpersonal Relations. New York: Wiley.
Hibbs, Douglas A., Jr. (1977). Political parties and macroeconomic policy.American Political Science Review 71:1467–1487.
Judd, Charles M., Kenny, David A., and Krosnick, Jon A. (1983). Judging the positions of presidential candidates: Models of assimilation and contrast.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 44:952–963.
Kiewiet, D. Roderick (1981). Policy oriented voting in response to economic issues.American Political Science Review 75:448–459.
Kinder, Donald R., Peters, Mark D., Abelson, Robert P., and Fiske, Susan T. (1980). Presidential prototypes.Political Behavior 2:325–337.
Lane, Robert E. (1962).Political Ideology. New York: Free Press.
Lau, Richard R., and Sears, David O. (1981). Cognitive links between economic grievances and political responses.Political Behavior 3:279–302.
Markus, Gregory B., and Converse, Philip E. (1979). A dynamic simultaneous equation model of electoral choice.American Political Science Review 73:1055–1070.
Miller, Arthur H. (1974). Political issues and trust in government.American Political Science Review 68:951–972.
Miroff, Bruce (1982). Monopolizing the public space: The president as a problem for democratic politics. In Thomas E. Cronin (ed.),Rethinking the Presidency, pp. 218–232. Boston: Little, Brown.
Monroe, Kristen R. (1983).Presidential Popularity and the Economy. New York: Praeger.
Muller, Edward N., and Jukam, Thomas O. (1977). On the meaning of political support.American Political Science Review 71:1561–1595.
Myers, David S. (1982). Editorials on the economy in the 1980 presidential campaign.Journalism Quarterly 59:414–419.
Peffley, Mark (1983). The attribution of presidential responsibility for economic problems. Paper prepared for delivery at the annual meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association, Chicago.
Popkin, Samuel, Gorman, John W., Phillips, Charles, and Smith, Jeffrey A. (1976). What have you done for me lately? Toward an investment theory of voting.American Political Science Review 70:779–805.
Rosenstone, Steven, and Kinder, Donald (1983). Measuring personal economic well-being. Report submitted to the Board of Overseers, National Election Studies and 1984 National Election Studies Planning Committee.
Sears, David O. (1969). Political behavior. InHandbook of Social Psychology, vol. 5, pp. 315–458. Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley.
Sigelman, Lee, and Knight, Kathleen (1983). Why does presidential popularity decline? A test of the expectation/disillusion theory.Public Opinion Quarterly 47:310–324.
Sniderman, Paul M., and Brody, Richard A. (1977). Coping: The ethic of self-reliance.American Journal of Political Science 21:501–521.
Stimson, James A. (1976). Public support for American presidents: A cyclical model.Public Opinion Quarterly 40:1–21.
Stimson, James A. (1976–77). On disillusion with the expectation/disillusion theory: A rejoinder.Public Opinion Quarterly 40:541–543.
Tanenhaus, Joseph, and Foley, Mary Ann (1981). Separating the objects of specific and diffuse support: Experiments in presidents and the presidency.Micropolitics 1:345–367.
Tufte, Edward (1978).Political Control of the Economy. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.
Tyler, Tom R. (1982). Personalization in attributing responsibility for national problems to the president.Political Behavior 4:379–399.
Wayne, Stephen J. (1982). Great expectations: What people want from presidents. In Thomas E. Cronin (ed.),Rethinking the Presidency, pp. 185–199. Boston: Little, Brown.
Wides, Jeffrey W., and Kuechler, Manfred (1981). Economic perceptions and the 1976 presidential vote: A WLS analysis.Micropolitics 1:369–393.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
Paper prepared for delivery at the 1984 Annual Meeting of the Southwestern Political Science Association, Fort Worth, Texas.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Sigelman, L., Knight, K. Public opinion and presidential responsibility for the economy: Understanding personalization. Polit Behav 7, 167–191 (1985). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00988797
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00988797