IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/pscirm/v7y2019i04p795-813_00.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Economic Perceptions and Electoral Choices: A Design-Based Approach

Author

Listed:
  • Visconti, Giancarlo

Abstract

Do economic perceptions affect voters’ electoral choices? There is ample evidence showing a correlation between how people perceive the current state of the economy and electoral decisions. However, there are reasons to believe that political preferences can also determine how voters evaluate economic conditions, which will reverse the causality arrow. The strategies previously implemented to address this problem have been based on the use of structural equations and instrumental variables, but they require very strong parametric or identification assumptions. In this paper, I follow a design-based approach by emphasizing the study design rather than statistical modeling. In contrast to previous studies that used the same panel data in Brazil, I find evidence that supports egotropic, rather than sociotropic, voting. This finding shows that traditional research designs may be overstating the magnitude of sociotropic economic voting.

Suggested Citation

  • Visconti, Giancarlo, 2019. "Economic Perceptions and Electoral Choices: A Design-Based Approach," Political Science Research and Methods, Cambridge University Press, vol. 7(4), pages 795-813, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:pscirm:v:7:y:2019:i:04:p:795-813_00
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S2049847017000267/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. Andreea Stancea & Aurelian Muntean, 2023. "An economic offer they cannot refuse! Economic expectations on incumbent government support in Core and periphery European countries," American Journal of Economics and Sociology, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 82(2), pages 99-119, March.

    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:pscirm:v:7:y:2019:i:04:p:795-813_00. 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/ram .

    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.