IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/intfor/v41y2025i2p702-715.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Partisan bias, attribute substitution, and the benefits of an indirect format for eliciting forecasts and judgments of trend

Author

Listed:
  • Comerford, David A.
  • Soll, Jack B.

Abstract

A majority of Americans reported the economy to be worsening when objective indicators showed it to be recovering. We show that this is symptomatic of attribute substitution—people answer a taxing question as though asked a related easy-to-answer question. An implication of attribute substitution is that forecasts will vary across a direct format, which asks whether the economy will be better in 12 months, versus an indirect format, which asks respondents to rate both current conditions and the conditions they expect for 12 months’ time. We compare these formats in three studies and over 2,000 respondents. Relative to the direct format, the indirect format delivers trends that show greater consensus across Republicans and Democrats; are less equivocal about the course of the US economy; and are more realistic about the magnitude of change in opinion poll data.

Suggested Citation

  • Comerford, David A. & Soll, Jack B., 2025. "Partisan bias, attribute substitution, and the benefits of an indirect format for eliciting forecasts and judgments of trend," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 41(2), pages 702-715.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:intfor:v:41:y:2025:i:2:p:702-715
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ijforecast.2024.11.005
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0169207024001092
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ijforecast.2024.11.005?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Stefano Cassella & Huseyin Gulen, 2018. "Extrapolation Bias and the Predictability of Stock Returns by Price-Scaled Variables," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 31(11), pages 4345-4397.
    2. William J. Burns & Ellen Peters & Paul Slovic, 2012. "Risk Perception and the Economic Crisis: A Longitudinal Study of the Trajectory of Perceived Risk," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 32(4), pages 659-677, April.
    3. Pedro Bordalo & Nicola Gennaioli & Andrei Shleifer, 2018. "Diagnostic Expectations and Credit Cycles," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 73(1), pages 199-227, February.
    4. Prior, Markus & Sood, Gaurav & Khanna, Kabir, 2015. "You Cannot be Serious: The Impact of Accuracy Incentives on Partisan Bias in Reports of Economic Perceptions," Quarterly Journal of Political Science, now publishers, vol. 10(4), pages 489-518, December.
    5. Bullock, John G. & Gerber, Alan S. & Hill, Seth J. & Huber, Gregory A., 2015. "Partisan Bias in Factual Beliefs about Politics," Quarterly Journal of Political Science, now publishers, vol. 10(4), pages 519-578, December.
    6. Markus Wagner & Jessica Tarlov & Nick Vivyan, 2014. "Partisan Bias in Opinion Formation on Episodes of Political Controversy: Evidence from Great Britain," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 62(1), pages 136-158, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Robbett, Andrea & Matthews, Peter Hans, 2018. "Partisan bias and expressive voting," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 157(C), pages 107-120.
    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. Huseyin Gulen & Mihai Ion & Candace E Jens & Stefano Rossi, 2024. "Credit Cycles, Expectations, and Corporate Investment," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 37(11), pages 3335-3385.
    4. Christopher Roth & Johannes Wohlfart, 2020. "How Do Expectations about the Macroeconomy Affect Personal Expectations and Behavior?," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 102(4), pages 731-748, October.
    5. Romain Espinosa & Jan Stoop, 2021. "Do people really want to be informed? Ex-ante evaluations of information-campaign effectiveness," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 24(4), pages 1131-1155, December.
    6. Brad R. Taylor, 2020. "The psychological foundations of rational ignorance: biased heuristics and decision costs," Constitutional Political Economy, Springer, vol. 31(1), pages 70-88, March.
    7. repec:hal:journl:hal-03533356 is not listed on IDEAS
    8. 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.
    9. Starkov, Egor, 2023. "Only time will tell: Credible dynamic signaling," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    10. Allcott, Hunt & Boxell, Levi & Conway, Jacob & Gentzkow, Matthew & Thaler, Michael & Yang, David, 2020. "Polarization and public health: Partisan differences in social distancing during the coronavirus pandemic," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 191(C).
    11. Jin, Lawrence J. & Sui, Pengfei, 2022. "Asset pricing with return extrapolation," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 145(2), pages 273-295.
    12. 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.
    13. 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.
    14. Wang, Hailong & Hu, Duni, 2022. "Heterogenous beliefs with sentiments and asset pricing," The North American Journal of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 63(C).
    15. Nikoloz Kudashvili & Philipp Lergetporer, 2019. "Do Minorities Misrepresent Their Ethnicity to Avoid Discrimination?," CERGE-EI Working Papers wp644, The Center for Economic Research and Graduate Education - Economics Institute, Prague.
    16. repec:osf:osfxxx:sdmhw_v1 is not listed on IDEAS
    17. Darya Korlyakova, 2021. "Learning about Ethnic Discrimination from Different Information Sources," CERGE-EI Working Papers wp689, The Center for Economic Research and Graduate Education - Economics Institute, Prague.
    18. Farjam, Mike & Bravo, Giangiacomo, 2023. "Do you really believe that? The effect of economic incentives on the acceptance of real-world data in a polarized context," OSF Preprints sdmhw, Center for Open Science.
    19. Da, Zhi & Huang, Xing & Jin, Lawrence J., 2021. "Extrapolative beliefs in the cross-section: What can we learn from the crowds?," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 140(1), pages 175-196.
    20. Kudashvili, Nikoloz & Lergetporer, Philipp, 2022. "Minorities’ strategic response to discrimination: Experimental evidence," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 208(C).
    21. Cassella, Stefano & Chen, Te-Feng & Gulen, Huseyin & Liu, Yan, 2025. "Extracting extrapolative beliefs from market prices: An augmented present-value approach," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 164(C).
    22. Adam L. Aiken & Jesse A. Ellis & Minjeong Kang, 2020. "Do Politicians “Put Their Money Where Their Mouth Is?” Ideology and Portfolio Choice," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 66(1), pages 376-396, January.

    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:eee:intfor:v:41:y:2025:i:2:p:702-715. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/ijforecast .

    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.