IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/amposc/v58y2014i1p48-62.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Informing the Electorate? How Party Cues and Policy Information Affect Public Opinion about Initiatives

Author

Listed:
  • Cheryl Boudreau
  • Scott A. MacKenzie

Abstract

Citizens in representative democracies receive party endorsements and policy information when choosing candidates or making policy decisions via the initiative process. What effects do these sources of information have on public opinion? We address this important question by conducting survey experiments where citizens express opinions about initiatives in a real‐world electoral context. We manipulate whether they receive party cues, policy information, both, or neither type of information. We find that citizens do not simply ignore policy information when they are also exposed to party cues. Rather, citizens respond by shifting their opinions away from their party's positions when policy information provides a compelling reason for doing so. These results challenge the prominent claim in public opinion research that citizens blindly follow their party when also exposed to policy information. They also suggest that efforts to inform the electorate can influence opinions, provided that citizens actually receive the information being disseminated.

Suggested Citation

  • Cheryl Boudreau & Scott A. MacKenzie, 2014. "Informing the Electorate? How Party Cues and Policy Information Affect Public Opinion about Initiatives," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 58(1), pages 48-62, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:amposc:v:58:y:2014:i:1:p:48-62
    DOI: 10.1111/ajps.12054
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/ajps.12054
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/ajps.12054?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. Dieter Dekeyser & Henk Roose, 2022. "Polarizing policy opinions with conflict framed information: activating negative views of political parties in a multi-party system," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 56(3), pages 1121-1138, June.
    2. Stefan Linde, 2020. "The Politicization of Risk: Party Cues, Polarization, and Public Perceptions of Climate Change Risk," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(10), pages 2002-2018, October.
    3. Maxime Walder & Oliver Strijbis, 2022. "Negative Party Identification and the Use of Party Cues in the Direct Democratic Context," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 10(4), pages 325-335.
    4. Yomna M. Sameer & Suzanna Elmassah & Charilaos Mertzanis & Lujain El-Maghraby, 2021. "Are Happier Nations More Responsible? Examining the Link Between Happiness and Sustainability," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 158(1), pages 267-295, November.
    5. Jäckle Sebastian, 2023. "Conscription Reloaded? The Debate About Compulsory Service in Germany in 2022 and the Peoples’ Attitudes Towards It," Statistics, Politics and Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 14(1), pages 65-89, March.
    6. Floyd Jiuyun Zhang, 2023. "Political endorsement by Nature and trust in scientific expertise during COVID-19," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 7(5), pages 696-706, May.
    7. Gingerich, Daniel W. & Scartascini, Carlos, 2022. "A heavy hand or a helping hand? Information provision and citizen preferences for anti-crime policies," Journal of Public Policy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 42(2), pages 364-389, June.
    8. Kayla S. Canelo, 2022. "Citations to Interest Groups and Acceptance of Supreme Court Decisions," Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 19(1), pages 189-222, March.
    9. Christenson, Dino P. & Goldfarb, Jillian L. & Kriner, Douglas L., 2017. "Costs, benefits, and the malleability of public support for “Fracking”," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 407-417.
    10. Ben M. Tappin & Adam J. Berinsky & David G. Rand, 2023. "Partisans’ receptivity to persuasive messaging is undiminished by countervailing party leader cues," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 7(4), pages 568-582, April.
    11. Briguglio, Marie & Delaney, Liam & Wood, Alex, 2018. "Partisanship, priming and participation in public-good schemes," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 136-150.
    12. Tosun, Jale & Schaub, Simon, 2015. "To mobilize or not: political attention and the regulation of GMOs," GMCC-15: Seventh GMCC, November 17-20, 2015, Amsterdam, the Netherlands 211493, International Conference on Coexistence between Genetically Modified (GM) and non-GM based Agricultural Supply Chains (GMCC).
    13. Dino P. Christenson & Douglas L. Kriner, 2017. "Constitutional Qualms or Politics as Usual? The Factors Shaping Public Support for Unilateral Action," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 61(2), pages 335-349, April.
    14. Valentina Stöhr, 2022. "Climate protection in Germany: Party cues in a multi-party system," Munich Papers in Political Economy 23, Munich School of Politics and Public Policy and the School of Management at the Technical University of Munich.
    15. Hassan Afrouzi & Carolina Arteaga & Emily Weisburst, 2022. "Can Leaders Persuade? Examining Movement in Immigration Beliefs," CESifo Working Paper Series 9593, CESifo.

    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:wly:amposc:v:58:y:2014:i:1:p:48-62. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1540-5907 .

    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.