IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hhs/ifauwp/2025_010.html

Processing macroeconomic signals: Voter responses to growth, unemployment, inflation and stock markets

Author

Listed:
  • Christensen, Love

    (Aarhus University)

  • Persson, Mikael

    (University of Gothenburg)

  • Schwenk, Jana

    (University of Gothenburg)

Abstract

Economic voting theory suggests that voters reward incumbents for strong economic performance and punish them for weak performance. However, this view often ignores the multidimensional nature of the economy. Hence, we lack systematic evidence about how voters simultaneously process multiple economic signals. This study provides a comprehensive examination of how voters respond to four key economic dimensions: growth, unemployment, inflation, and stock markets. We develop a theoretical framework distinguishing between different types of economic reasoning: macroeconomic, egotropic, sociotropic, and distributive reasoning. We first use descriptive data from OECD countries to understand the economy’s dimensionality and analyze survey data from national election studies to assess the impact on economic evaluations. Finally, we present findings from survey experiments conducted in Germany, Sweden, and the United States, tailored to analyze the impact of the four economic dimensions in an ideal information setting. Our results reveal interesting patterns in how voters process economic information. Voters can discern relationships between economic dimensions and their effects on personal and economic circumstances, and distributional outcomes. Subsequently, all four signals independently affect preferences for economic policy and voting intentions. Inflation emerges as a dominant factor, shaping personal and national economic evaluations. Our findings challenge traditional approaches to economic voting by exploring how voters integrate multiple economic signals. By emphasizing the multidimensionality of economic signals, we highlight implications for democratic accountability.

Suggested Citation

  • Christensen, Love & Persson, Mikael & Schwenk, Jana, 2025. "Processing macroeconomic signals: Voter responses to growth, unemployment, inflation and stock markets," Working Paper Series 2025:10, IFAU - Institute for Evaluation of Labour Market and Education Policy.
  • Handle: RePEc:hhs:ifauwp:2025_010
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.ifau.se/globalassets/pdf/se/2025/wp-2025-10-processing-macroeconomic-signals-voter-responses-to-growth-unemployment-inflation-and-stock-markets.pdf
    File Function: Full text
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Healy, Andrew J. & Persson, Mikael & Snowberg, Erik, 2017. "Digging into the Pocketbook: Evidence on Economic Voting from Income Registry Data Matched to a Voter Survey," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 111(4), pages 771-785, November.
    2. Sam Peltzman, 1992. "Voters as Fiscal Conservatives," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 107(2), pages 327-361.
    3. Peltzman, Sam, 1990. "How Efficient Is the Voting Market?," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 33(1), pages 27-63, April.
    4. Larry M. Bartels, 2016. "Unequal Democracy:The Political Economy of the New Gilded Age," Economics Books, Princeton University Press, edition 2, number 10831, December.
    5. Brad T. Gomez & J. Matthew Wilson, 2006. "Cognitive Heterogeneity and Economic Voting: A Comparative Analysis of Four Democratic Electorates," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 50(1), pages 127-145, January.
    6. Kinder, Donald R. & Kiewiet, D. Roderick, 1981. "Sociotropic Politics: The American Case," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 11(2), pages 129-161, April.
    7. Bojar, Abel & Bremer, Björn & Kriesi, Hanspeter & Wang, Chendi, 2022. "The Effect of Austerity Packages on Government Popularity During the Great Recession," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 52(1), pages 181-199, January.
    8. Debus, Marc & Stegmaier, Mary & Tosun, Jale, 2014. "Economic Voting under Coalition Governments: Evidence from Germany," Political Science Research and Methods, Cambridge University Press, vol. 2(1), pages 49-67, April.
    9. Hibbs, Douglas A., 1982. "Economic Outcomes and Political Support for British Governments among Occupational Classes: A Dynamic Analysis," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 76(2), pages 259-279, June.
    10. Larry M. Bartels, 2016. "The New Gilded Age," Introductory Chapters, in: Unequal Democracy:The Political Economy of the New Gilded Age, Princeton University Press.
    11. Palmer, Harvey D. & Whitten, Guy D., 1999. "The Electoral Impact of Unexpected Inflation and Economic Growth," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 29(4), pages 623-639, September.
    12. Andrew Healy & Gabriel S. Lenz, 2014. "Substituting the End for the Whole: Why Voters Respond Primarily to the Election‐Year Economy," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 58(1), pages 31-47, January.
    13. Kenneth Scheve & Matthew J. Slaughter, 2004. "Economic Insecurity and the Globalization of Production," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 48(4), pages 662-674, October.
    14. Hellwig, Timothy & Samuels, David, 2008. "Electoral Accountability and the Variety of Democratic Regimes," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 38(1), pages 65-90, January.
    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. Philipp Steinbrunner & Marina Di Giacomo & Wolfgang Nagl, 2026. "Trump digs votes: the role of Trump’s coal campaign in the 2016 presidential election," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 75(2), pages 1-66, June.

    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. Andrew J. Healy & Mikael Persson & Erik Snowberg, 2016. "Digging into the Pocketbook: Evidence on Economic Voting from Income Registry Data Matched to a Voter Survey," CESifo Working Paper Series 6171, CESifo.
    2. Bernt Bratsberg & Andreas Kotsadam & Jo Thori Lind & Halvor Mehlum & Oddbjørn Raaum, 2019. "Election Turnout Inequality - Insights from Administrative Registers," CESifo Working Paper Series 7465, CESifo.
    3. Komlos, John & Schubert, Hermann, 2019. "Les origines du triomphe de Donald Trump," Revue de la Régulation - Capitalisme, institutions, pouvoirs, Association Recherche et Régulation, vol. 26.
    4. Marcel Preuss & Germ'an Reyes & Jason Somerville & Joy Wu, 2025. "Are Elites Meritocratic and Efficiency-Seeking? Evidence from MBA Students," Papers 2503.15443, arXiv.org, revised May 2026.
    5. John Komlos, 2021. "Macroeconomic Inequality from Reagan to Trump. Market Power, Wage Repression, Asset Price Inflation, and Industrial Decline," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 97(318), pages 450-453, September.
    6. Conconi, Paola & DeRemer, David R. & Kirchsteiger, Georg & Trimarchi, Lorenzo & Zanardi, Maurizio, 2017. "Suspiciously timed trade disputes," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 57-76.
    7. Çağatay Bircan & Orkun Saka, 2021. "Lending Cycles and Real Outcomes: Costs of Political Misalignment," The Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 131(639), pages 2763-2796.
    8. Bartak, Jakub & Jabłoński, Łukasz & Obłąkowska, Katarzyna, 2025. "Fiscal policy preferences: Evidence from conjoint experiments in Poland," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 87(C).
    9. Zamir Eyal, 2020. "Refounding Law and Economics: Behavioral Support for the Predictions of Standard Economic Analysis," Review of Law & Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 16(2), pages 1-35, July.
    10. Florian Scheuer & Joel Slemrod, 2021. "Taxing Our Wealth," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 35(1), pages 207-230, Winter.
    11. Andrés César & Guillermo Falcone & Pablo Garriga, 2022. "Robots, Exports and Top Income Inequality: Evidence for the U.S," CEDLAS, Working Papers 0307, CEDLAS, Universidad Nacional de La Plata.
    12. Ali Akarca, 2018. "Political Determinants of Government Structure and Economic Performance in Turkey since 1950," Working Papers 1241, Economic Research Forum, revised 23 Oct 2018.
    13. Çağatay Bircan & Orkun Saka, 2021. "Lending Cycles and Real Outcomes: Costs of Political Misalignment," The Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 131(639), pages 2763-2796.
    14. Avdeenko, Alexandra, 2018. "Long-term evidence of retrospective voting: A natural experiment from the German Democratic Republic," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 83-107.
    15. Florian Scheuer & Joel Slemrod, 2020. "Taxation and the Superrich," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 12(1), pages 189-211, August.
    16. Richard Clark & Sarah Kreps & Adi Rao, 2025. "The political economy of reshoring: Evidence from the semiconductor industry," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 20(2), pages 1-14, February.
    17. Manuel Hensmans, 2021. "Exploring the dark and bright sides of Internet democracy: Ethos-reversing and ethos-renewing digital transformation," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/321232, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    18. Revelli, Federico, 2002. "Local taxes, national politics and spatial interactions in English district election results," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 281-299, June.
    19. Laura Bianchini & Federico Revelli, 2013. "Green Polities: Urban Environmental Performance and Government Popularity," Economics and Politics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 25(1), pages 72-90, March.
    20. J. S. Maloy, 2014. "Linkages of Electoral Accountability: Empirical Results and Methodological Lessons," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 2(2), pages 13-27.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • D72 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Political Processes: Rent-seeking, Lobbying, Elections, Legislatures, and Voting Behavior
    • P16 - Political Economy and Comparative Economic Systems - - Capitalist Economies - - - Capitalist Institutions; Welfare State

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:hhs:ifauwp:2025_010. 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: Malin Lindkvist (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ifagvse.html .

    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.