IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/polals/v21y2013i01p48-69_01.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Asking About Numbers: Why and How

Author

Listed:
  • Ansolabehere, Stephen
  • Meredith, Marc
  • Snowberg, Erik

Abstract

Survey questions about quantities offer a number of advantages over more common qualitative questions. However, concerns about survey respondents' abilities to accurately report numbers have limited the use of quantitative questions. This article shows quantitative questions are feasible and useful for the study of economic voting. First, survey respondents are capable of accurately assessing familiar economic quantities, such as the price of gas. Second, careful question design—in particular providing respondents with benchmark quantities—can reduce measurement error due to respondents not understanding the scale on which more complex quantities, such as the unemployment rate, are measured. Third, combining quantitative and qualitative questions sheds light on where partisan bias enters economic assessments: in perceiving, judging, or reporting economic quantities.

Suggested Citation

  • Ansolabehere, Stephen & Meredith, Marc & Snowberg, Erik, 2013. "Asking About Numbers: Why and How," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 21(1), pages 48-69, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:polals:v:21:y:2013:i:01:p:48-69_01
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1047198700013279/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Christopher Roth & Sonja Settele & Johannes Wohlfart, 2022. "Risk Exposure and Acquisition of Macroeconomic Information," American Economic Review: Insights, American Economic Association, vol. 4(1), pages 34-53, March.
    2. Ingar Haaland & Christopher Roth & Johannes Wohlfart, 2023. "Designing Information Provision Experiments," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 61(1), pages 3-40, March.
    3. Grewenig, Elisabeth & Lergetporer, Philipp & Werner, Katharina & Woessmann, Ludger, 2022. "Incentives, search engines, and the elicitation of subjective beliefs: Evidence from representative online survey experiments," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 231(1), pages 304-326.
    4. Andrew J. Healy & Mikael Persson & Erik Snowberg, 2016. "Digging into the Pocketbook: Evidence on Economic Voting from Income Registry Data Matched to a Voter Survey," CESifo Working Paper Series 6171, CESifo.
    5. Pietro Ortoleva & Erik Snowberg, 2015. "Overconfidence in Political Behavior," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 105(2), pages 504-535, February.
    6. Werfel, Seth H., 2018. "Does charitable giving crowd out support for government spending?," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 171(C), pages 83-86.
    7. Roth, Christopher & Settele, Sonja & Wohlfart, Johannes, 2022. "Beliefs about public debt and the demand for government spending," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 231(1), pages 165-187.
    8. Ingar Haaland & Julian König & Christopher Roth & Johannes Wohlfart, 2024. "Information Experiments," ECONtribute Discussion Papers Series 271, University of Bonn and University of Cologne, Germany.
    9. Ortoleva, Pietro & Snowberg, Erik, 2015. "Are conservatives overconfident?," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 40(PB), pages 333-344.
    10. Sonja Settele & Cortnie Shupe, 2020. "Lives or Livelihoods? Perceived Tradeoffs and Public Demand for Non-Pharmaceutical Interventions," CEBI working paper series 20-17, University of Copenhagen. Department of Economics. The Center for Economic Behavior and Inequality (CEBI).

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:polals:v:21:y:2013:i:01:p:48-69_01. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/pan .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.