IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/eeupol/v21y2020i2p255-275.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Expectations, vote choice and opinion stability since the 2016 Brexit referendum

Author

Listed:
  • Charlotte Grynberg

    (Department of International Relations, London School of Economics and Political Science, London, UK)

  • Stefanie Walter

    (Institute of Political Science, University of Zurich, Switzerland)

  • Fabio Wasserfallen

Abstract

A surprising development in the post-referendum Brexit process has been that vote intentions have remained largely stable, despite the cumbersome withdrawal negotiations. We examine this puzzle by analyzing the role of voters’ expectations about the European Union’s willingness to accommodate the UK after the pro-Brexit vote. Using data from the British Election Study, we explore how these expectations are updated over time, and how they are related to vote intentions. We find that voters who were more optimistic about the European Union’s response were more likely to vote Leave. Over the course of the negotiations, Leavers have become more disillusioned. These adjustments, however, have not translated into shifts in vote intentions. Overall, we find evidence that motivated reasoning is an important driver of public opinion on Brexit.

Suggested Citation

  • Charlotte Grynberg & Stefanie Walter & Fabio Wasserfallen, 2020. "Expectations, vote choice and opinion stability since the 2016 Brexit referendum," European Union Politics, , vol. 21(2), pages 255-275, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:eeupol:v:21:y:2020:i:2:p:255-275
    DOI: 10.1177/1465116519892328
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1465116519892328
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/1465116519892328?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Dhingra, Swati & Ottaviano, Gianmarco I. P. & Sampson, Thomas & Reenen, John Van, 2016. "The consequences of Brexit for UK trade and living standards," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 66144, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    2. Alabrese, Eleonora & Becker, Sascha O. & Fetzer, Thiemo & Novy, Dennis, 2019. "Who voted for Brexit? Individual and regional data combined," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 132-150.
    3. Hooghe, Liesbet & Marks, Gary, 2009. "A Postfunctionalist Theory of European Integration: From Permissive Consensus to Constraining Dissensus," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 39(1), pages 1-23, January.
    4. Walter, Stefanie & Dinas, Elias & Jurado, Ignacio & Konstantinidis, Nikitas, 2018. "Noncooperation by Popular Vote: Expectations, Foreign Intervention, and the Vote in the 2015 Greek Bailout Referendum," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 72(4), pages 969-994, October.
    5. Charles S. Taber & Milton Lodge, 2006. "Motivated Skepticism in the Evaluation of Political Beliefs," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 50(3), pages 755-769, July.
    6. Sascha O Becker & Thiemo Fetzer & Dennis Novy, 2017. "Who voted for Brexit? A comprehensive district-level analysis," Economic Policy, CEPR, CESifo, Sciences Po;CES;MSH, vol. 32(92), pages 601-650.
    7. Joshua D. Kertzer & Thomas Zeitzoff, 2017. "A Bottom‐Up Theory of Public Opinion about Foreign Policy," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 61(3), pages 543-558, July.
    8. Erica Owen & Stefanie Walter, 2017. "Open economy politics and Brexit: insights, puzzles, and ways forward," Review of International Political Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 24(2), pages 179-202, March.
    9. Rafal Kierzenkowski & Nigel Pain & Elena Rusticelli & Sanne Zwart, 2016. "The Economic Consequences of Brexit: A Taxing Decision," OECD Economic Policy Papers 16, OECD Publishing.
    10. Lupia, Arthur, 1994. "Shortcuts Versus Encyclopedias: Information and Voting Behavior in California Insurance Reform Elections," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 88(1), pages 63-76, March.
    11. Martin Bisgaard & Rune Slothuus, 2018. "Partisan Elites as Culprits? How Party Cues Shape Partisan Perceptual Gaps," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 62(2), pages 456-469, April.
    12. Sascha Becker & Thiemo Fetzer & Dennis Novy & Sascha O. Becker, 2017. "Who Voted for Brexit?," ifo DICE Report, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, vol. 15(04), pages 03-05, December.
    13. Colantone, Italo & Stanig, Piero, 2018. "Global Competition and Brexit," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 112(2), pages 201-218, May.
    14. Leemann, Lucas & Wasserfallen, Fabio, 2016. "The Democratic Effect of Direct Democracy," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 110(4), pages 750-762, November.
    15. Mark Blyth, 2016. "After the Brits Have Gone and the Trumpets Have Sounded: Turning a Drama into a Crisis That Will Not Go to Waste," Intereconomics: Review of European Economic Policy, Springer;ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics;Centre for European Policy Studies (CEPS), vol. 51(6), pages 324-331, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Lucio Baccaro & Björn Bremer & Erik Neimanns, 2021. "Till austerity do us part? A survey experiment on support for the euro in Italy," European Union Politics, , vol. 22(3), pages 401-423, September.
    2. Ignacio Jurado & Stefanie Walter & Nikitas Konstantinidis & Elias Dinas, 2020. "Keeping the euro at any cost? Explaining attitudes toward the euro-austerity trade-off in Greece," European Union Politics, , vol. 21(3), pages 383-405, September.
    3. Ronja Sczepanski, 2023. "European by action: How voting reshapes nested identities," European Union Politics, , vol. 24(4), pages 751-770, December.

    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. Andreas Dür & Christoph Moser & Gabriele Spilker, 2020. "The political economy of the European Union," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 15(3), pages 561-572, July.
    2. Maria Abreu & Özge Öner, 2020. "Disentangling the Brexit vote: The role of economic, social and cultural contexts in explaining the UK’s EU referendum vote," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 52(7), pages 1434-1456, October.
    3. Giammetti, Raffaele, 2019. "Tariffs, Domestic Import Substitution and Trade Diversion in Input-Output Production Networks: how to deal with Brexit," MPRA Paper 93229, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. Eugenio Levi & Isabelle Sin & Steven Stillman, 2021. "Understanding the Origins of Populist Political Parties and the Role of External Shocks," Working Papers 21_09, Motu Economic and Public Policy Research.
    5. Alabrese, Eleonora & Becker, Sascha O. & Fetzer, Thiemo & Novy, Dennis, 2019. "Who voted for Brexit? Individual and regional data combined," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 132-150.
    6. Swati Dhingra & Stephen Machin & Henry Overman, 2017. "Local Economic Effects of Brexit," National Institute Economic Review, National Institute of Economic and Social Research, vol. 242(1), pages 24-36, November.
    7. Fetzer, Thiemo & Wang, Shizhuo, 2020. "Measuring the Regional Economic Cost of Brexit: Evidence up to 2019," CEPR Discussion Papers 15051, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    8. Stephen Drinkwater & Colin Jennings, 2022. "The Brexit referendum and three types of regret," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 193(3), pages 275-291, December.
    9. Crescenzi, Riccardo & Di Cataldo, Marco & Giua, Mara, 2020. "It’s not about the money. EU funds, local opportunities, and Euroscepticism," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 84(C).
    10. Baccaro, Lucio & Bremer, Björn & Neimanns, Erik, 2020. "Is the euro up for grabs? Evidence from a survey experiment," MPIfG Discussion Paper 20/10, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies.
    11. Johan A Elkink & Sarah Parlane & Thomas Sattler, 2020. "When one side stays home: A joint model of turnout and vote choice," Working Papers 202012, Geary Institute, University College Dublin.
    12. Stephen Drinkwater, 2021. "Brexit and the ‘left behind’: Job polarization and the rise in support for leaving the European Union," Industrial Relations Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 52(6), pages 569-588, November.
    13. Rolf J. Langhammer & Lisandra Flach & Feodora Teti & Lena Wiest & Margherita Atzei & Lisa Scheckenhofer & Joachim Wuermeling & Carsten Hefeker & Friedemann Kainer & Philipp Harms & Michael Kaeding, 2020. "Brexit-Finale: Das letzte Ringen um einen Deal," ifo Schnelldienst, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, vol. 73(12), pages 03-27, December.
    14. Georgios Xezonakis & Felix Hartmann, 2020. "Economic downturns and the Greek referendum of 2015: Evidence using night-time light data," European Union Politics, , vol. 21(3), pages 361-382, September.
    15. Giammetti, Raffaele, 2019. "Tariffs, Domestic Import Substitution and Trade Diversion in Input-Output Production Networks: how to deal with Brexit," MPRA Paper 92835, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    16. Lucio Baccaro & Björn Bremer & Erik Neimanns, 2021. "Till austerity do us part? A survey experiment on support for the euro in Italy," European Union Politics, , vol. 22(3), pages 401-423, September.
    17. Harms, Philipp & Schwab, Jakob, 2020. "Depression of the deprived or eroding enthusiasm of the elites: What has shifted the support for international trade?," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 64(C).
    18. Thiemo Fetzer & Stephan Kyburz, 2024. "Cohesive Institutions and Political Violence," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 106(1), pages 133-150, January.
    19. Sascha O. Becker & Thiemo Fetzer, 2018. "Has Eastern European Migration Impacted UK-born Workers?," CAGE Online Working Paper Series 376, Competitive Advantage in the Global Economy (CAGE).
    20. Andrés Rodríguez-Pose & Neil Lee & Cornelius Lipp, 2021. "Golfing with Trump. Social capital, decline, inequality, and the rise of populism in the US," Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 14(3), pages 457-481.

    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:sae:eeupol:v:21:y:2020:i:2:p:255-275. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.