IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/now/jlqjps/100.00015100.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Economic Behavior and the Partisan Perceptual Screen

Author

Listed:
  • McGrath, Mary C.

Abstract

Partisans report different perceptions from the same set of facts. According to the perceptual screen hypothesis, this difference arises because partisans perceive different realities. An alternative hypothesis is that partisans take even fact-based questions as an opportunity to voice support for their team. In 2009, Gerber and Huber conducted the first behavioral test of the perceptual screen hypothesis outside of the lab. I re-analyze Gerber and HuberÂ’s original data and collect new data from two additional U.S. elections. Gerber and HuberÂ’s finding of a relationship between partisanship and economic behavior does not hold when observations from a single state-year (Texas in 1996) are excluded from their analysis. Out-of-sample replication based on the two U.S. presidential elections since the original study similarly shows no evidence of an effect. Given these results, the balance of evidence tips toward the conclusion that economic perceptions are not filtered through partisanship.

Suggested Citation

  • McGrath, Mary C., 2017. "Economic Behavior and the Partisan Perceptual Screen," Quarterly Journal of Political Science, now publishers, vol. 11(4), pages 363-383, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:now:jlqjps:100.00015100
    DOI: 10.1561/100.00015100
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1561/100.00015100
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1561/100.00015100?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Gordon B. Dahl & Runjing Lu & William Mullins, 2022. "Partisan Fertility and Presidential Elections," American Economic Review: Insights, American Economic Association, vol. 4(4), pages 473-490, December.
    2. Fos, Vyacheslav & Kempf, Elisabeth & Tsoutsoura, Margarita, 2021. "The Political Polarization of Corporate America," Working Papers 313, The University of Chicago Booth School of Business, George J. Stigler Center for the Study of the Economy and the State.
    3. Elisabeth Kempf & Margarita Tsoutsoura, 2021. "Partisan Professionals: Evidence from Credit Rating Analysts," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 76(6), pages 2805-2856, December.
    4. Erik Peterson & Shanto Iyengar, 2021. "Partisan Gaps in Political Information and Information‐Seeking Behavior: Motivated Reasoning or Cheerleading?," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 65(1), pages 133-147, January.
    5. Barrios, John M. & Hochberg, Yael V., 2021. "Risk perceptions and politics: Evidence from the COVID-19 pandemic," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 142(2), pages 862-879.
    6. Maarten Meeuwis & Jonathan A. Parker & Antoinette Schoar & Duncan Simester, 2022. "Belief Disagreement and Portfolio Choice," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 77(6), pages 3191-3247, December.
    7. Emmanuel Apergis & Nicholas Apergis, 2021. "Can the COVID-19 Pandemic and Oil Prices Drive the US Partisan Conflict Index," Energy RESEARCH LETTERS, Asia-Pacific Applied Economics Association, vol. 1(1), pages 1-4.
    8. Ying Fan & A. Yeşim Orhun & Dana Turjeman, 2020. "Heterogeneous Actions, Beliefs, Constraints and Risk Tolerance During the COVID-19 Pandemic," NBER Working Papers 27211, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    9. W. Ben McCartney & John Orellana & Calvin Zhang, 2021. "“Sort Selling”: Political Polarization and Residential Choice," Working Papers 21-14, Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia.
    10. Engelberg, Joseph E. & Guzman, Jorge & Lu, Runjing & Mullins, William, 2021. "Partisan Entrepreneurship," SocArXiv qhs6j, Center for Open Science.
    11. 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.
    12. Ethan Struby & Christina Farhart, 2024. "Inflation Expectations and Political Polarization: Evidence from the Cooperative Election Study," Working Papers 2024-01, Carleton College, Department of Economics.

    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:now:jlqjps:100.00015100. 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: Lucy Wiseman (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.nowpublishers.com/ .

    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.