Democratic accountability requires that citizens accurately attribute credit and blame to leaders and institutions. However, citizens tend to simplify politics by personifying the state as its leader and directing credit and blame accordingly. Using an expert survey and a five-wave public panel survey spanning two administrations, we contrast public and expert perceptions of presidential power. We demonstrate that the public exaggerates the president’s powers relative to scholarly experts and that people who exaggerate presidential powers most are more likely to attribute blame to the president. However, a change in partisan control of the presidency shifts perceptions of power among partisans. Finally, we find suggestive evidence of similar shifts in belief after salient policy failures. These results provide the most direct evidence to date that citizens generally exaggerate the president’s influence and control but that these beliefs change over time in response to events.
AchenChristopher H.BartelsLarry M.. 2016. Democracy for Realists: Why Elections Do Not Produce Responsive Government. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
2.
AlickeMark D.2000. “Culpable Control and the Psychology of Blame.” Psychological Bulletin126 (4): 556.
BalmasMeital. 2018. “Tell Me Who Is Your Leader, and I Will Tell You Who You Are: Foreign Leaders’ Perceived Personality and Public Attitudes toward Their Countries and Citizenry.” American Journal of Political Science62 (2):499–514.
8.
BenjaminDaniel JacobBergerJamesJohannessonMagnusNosekBrian AWagenmakersEric-JanBerkRichardBollenKennethBrembsBjörnBrownLawrenceCamererColin, et al.2017. “Redefine Statistical Significance.” Nature Human Behavior.
9.
BerinskyAdam J.HuberGregory A.LenzGabriel S.. 2012. “Evaluating Online Labor Markets for Experimental Research: Amazon.Com’s Mechanical Turk.” Political Analysis3 (20): 351–368.
10.
Bisgaard MartinSlothuusRune. Partisan Elites as Culprits? How Party Cues Shape Partisan Perceptual Gaps. American Journal of Political Science. 2018; 622: 456–469.
BradyDavid W.FerejohnJohn A.ParkerBrett. 2021. “Cognitive Political Economy: A Growing Partisan Divide in Economic Perceptions.” American Politics Research. 50(1): 1–14.
13.
ChristensonDino P.GlickDavid M.. 2015a. “Chief Justice Roberts’s Health Care Decision Disrobed: The Microfoundations of the Supreme Court’s Legitimacy.” American Journal of Political Science59 (2): 403–418.
14.
ChristensonDino P.GlickDavid M.. 2015b. “Issue-Specific Opinion Change: The Supreme Court and Health Care Reform.” Public Opinion Quarterly79 (4): 881–905.
15.
CliffordScottJewellRyan M.WaggonerPhilip D.. 2015. “Are Samples Drawn from Mechanical Turk Valid for Research on Political Ideology?” Research & Politics2 (4): 2053168015622072.
Delli CarpiniMichael X.KeeterScott. 1996. What Americans Know about Politics and Why it Matters. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
19.
DonovanKathleenKellstedtPaul M.KeyEllen M.LeboMatthew J.. 2020. “Motivated Reasoning, Public Opinion, and Presidential Approval.” Political Behavior42 (4): 1201–1221.
20.
EdwardsGeorge C.2003. On Deaf Ears: The Limits of the Bully Pulpit. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
21.
EdwardsGeorge C.2012. Overreach: Leadership in the Obama Presidency. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
22.
Fernández-AlbertosJoséKuoAlexanderBalcellsLaia. 2013. “Economic Crisis, Globalization, and Partisan Bias: Evidence from Spain.” International Studies Quarterly57 (4): 804–816.
23.
FiskeSusan T. 1980. “Attention and Weight in Person Perception: The Impact of Negative and Extreme Behavior.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology38 (6): 889–906.
24.
GawronskiBertram. 2004. “Theory-based Bias Correction in Dispositional Inference: The Fundamental Attribution Error Is Dead, Long Live the Correspondence Bias.” European Review of Social Psychology15 (1): 183–217.
GomezBrad T.WilsonJ. Matthew. 2001. “Political Sophistication and Economic Voting in the American Electorate: A Theory of Heterogeneous Attribution.” American Journal of Political Science45 (4): 899–914.
28.
GomezBrad T.WilsonJ. Matthew. 2003. “Causal Attribution and Economic Voting in American Congressional Elections.” Political Research Quarterly56 (3): 271–282.
29.
Gomez BradT.WilsonJ. Matthew.2008. “Political Sophistication and Attributions of Blame in the Wake of Hurricane Katrina.” Publius38(4): 633–650.
30.
HellwigTimothyCoffeyEva. 2011. “Public Opinion, Party Messages, and Responsibility for the Financial Crisis in Britain.” Electoral Studies30 (3): 417–426.
31.
HoboltSara B.TilleyJames. 2014. Blaming Europe? Responsibility Without Accountability in the European Union. USA: Oxford University Press.
32.
HoogheLiesbetBakkerRyanBrigevichAnnaDe VriesCatherineEdwardsEricaMarksGaryRovnyJanSteenbergenMarcoVachudovaMilada. 2010. “Reliability and Validity of Measuring Party Positions: The Chapel Hill Expert Surveys of 2002 and 2006.” European Journal of Political Research49 (5): 687–703.
KaneJohn V.2016. “Control, Accountability, and Constraints: Rethinking Perceptions of Presidential Responsibility for the Economy.” Presidential Studies Quarterly46 (2): 335–364.
36.
KaneJohn V.AnsonIan G.. 2022. “Deficit Attention Disorder: Partisanship, Issue Importance and Concern About Government Overspending.” Political Behavior. doi:10.1007/s11109-022-09783-5.
37.
Kinder DonaldR. (ed). 1986. “Presidential Character Revisited.” In Political Cognition. Erlbaum Associates.
LauRichard R.1985. “Two Explanations for Negativity Effects in Political Behavior.” American Journal of Political Science29 (1): 119–138.
40.
LeboMatthew J.CassinoDaniel. 2007a. “The Aggregated Consequences of Motivated Reasoning and the Dynamics of Partisan Presidential Approval.” Political Psychology28 (6): 719–746.
41.
LeboMatthew J.CassinoDaniel. 2007b. “The Aggregated Consequences of Motivated Reasoning and the Dynamics of Partisan Presidential Approval.” Political Psychology28 (6): 719–746.
LippmannWalter. 1922. The World Outside and the Pictures in Our Heads. New York, NY: MacMilla.
44.
LowandeKennethShipanCharles R.. 2021. “Where Is Presidential Power? Measuring Presidential Discretion Using Experts.” British Journal of Political Science.
45.
LupiaArthurMcCubbinsMathew D.. 1998. The Democratic Dilemma: Can Citizens Learn What They Need to Know?New York: Cambridge University Press.
46.
MaestasCherie D.ButticeMatthew K.StoneWalter J.. 2014. “Extracting Wisdom From Experts and Small Crowds: Strategies for Improving Informant-Based Measures of Political Concepts.” Political Analysis22 (3): 354–373.
47.
MarshMichaelTilleyJames. 2010. “The Attribution of Credit and Blame to Governments and its Impact on Vote Choice.” British Journal of Political Science40 (1): 115–134.
McGrawKathleen M.DolanThomas M.. 2007. “Personifying the State: Consequences for Attitude Formation.” Political Psychology28 (3): 299–327.
51.
MillerJoshua D.CroweMichaelWeissBrandonMaples-KellerJessica L.LynamDonald R.. 2017. “Using Online, Crowdsourcing Platforms for Data Collection in Personality Disorder Research: The Example of Amazon’s Mechanical Turk.” Personality Disorders: Theory, Research, and Treatment8 (1): 26–34.
52.
MullinixKevin J.LeeperThomas J.DruckmanJames N.FreeseJeremy. 2015. “The Generalizability of Survey Experiments.” Journal of Experimental Political Science2 (02): 109–138.
RahnWendy M.AldrichJohn H.BorgidaEugeneSullivanJohn L.. 1990. “A Social-Cognitive Model of Candidate Appraisal.” Information and Democratic Processes, 136–159.
57.
RudolphThomas J.2003. “Who’s Responsible for the Economy? The Formation and Consequences of Responsibility Attributions.” American Journal of Political Science47 (4): 698–713.
58.
RudolphThomas J.2006. “Triangulating Political Responsibility: The Motivated Formation of Responsibility Judgments.” Political Psychology27 (1): 99–122.
59.
SigelmanLeeKnightKathleen. 1983. “Why Does Presidential Popularity Decline? A Test of the Expectation/Disillusion Theory.” The Public Opinion Quarterly47 (3): 310–324.
60.
SirinCigdem V.VillalobosJose D.. 2011. “Where Does the Buck Stop? Applying Attribution Theory to Examine Public Appraisals of the President.” Presidential Studies Quarterly41 (2): 334–357.
61.
SorokaStuartMcAdamsStephen. 2015. “News, Politics, and Negativity.” Political Communication32 (1): 1–22.
62.
SteenbergenMarco R.MarksGary. 2007. “Evaluating Expert Judgments.” European Journal of Political Research46 (3): 347–366.
63.
TilleyJamesHoboltSara B.. 2011. “Is the Government to Blame? An Experimental Test of How Partisanship Shapes Perceptions of Performance and Responsibility.” Journal of Politics73 (2): 316–330.
64.
TodorovAlexanderUlemanJames S.. 2003. “The Efficiency of Binding Spontaneous Trait Inferences to Actors’ Faces.” Journal of Experimental Social Psychology39 (6): 549–562.
65.
TropeYaacovGauntRuth. 2000. “Processing Alternative Explanations of Behavior: Correction or Integration?” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology79 (3): 344–354.
66.
TulisJeffrey. 1988. The Rhetorical Presidency. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
67.
WatermanRichardSilvaCarol L.Jenkins-SmithHank. 2014. The Presidential Expectations Gap: Public Attitudes Concerning the Presidency. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
68.
WeinerRachelClementScott. 2012. “Why Obama Gets Less Blame Than Bush for High Gas Prices.” Washington Post, March 30, 2012. Downloaded July 27, 2021 from. https://wapo.st/GYPL7G?tid=ss_tw
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
