In this paper, we explore the roots of perceptions of local corruption in U.S. cities, using survey data collected from 39 cities during 40 different mayoral election campaigns. We examine the impact of the city-level corruption context alongside measures of political information, partisan and racial/ethnic representation in local government, evaluations of personal and policy satisfaction, and other individual-level attitudinal and demographic characteristics. We find that perceptions of local corruption are responsive to the local corruption context—though this relationship is heavily conditioned by political knowledge—satisfaction with local conditions, other attitudinal measures, and, to a lesser extent, co-ethnic representation in local government.
AchenChristopherBartelsLarry. Democracy for Realists: Why Elections Do Not Produce Responsive Government. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2017.
2.
AndersonChristopher JTverdovaYuliya V. 2003. “Corruption, Political Allegiances, and Attitudes Toward Government in Contemporary Democracies.” American Journal of Political Science47 (1): 91.
3.
AnduizaE.GallegoA.MuñozJ.. 2013. “Turning a Blind Eye: Experimental Evidence of Partisan Bias in Attitudes toward Corruption.” Comparative Political Studies46 (12): 1664–1692.
4.
AgerbergM.2020. “The Lesser Evil? Corruption Voting and the Importance of Clean Alternatives.” Comparative Political Studies53 (2): 253–287.
5.
AresM.HernándezE.. 2017. “The Corrosive Effect of Corruption on Trust in Politicians: Evidence from a Natural Experiment.” Research & Politics4 (2). doi:10.1177/2053168017714185.
6.
AgerbergMattias. 2022. “Corrupted Estimates? Response Bias in Citizen Surveys on Corruption.” Political Behavior44 (2): 653–678.
7.
BartelsLarry M.2002. “Beyond the Running Tally: Partisan Bias in Political Perceptions.” Political Behavior24: 117–150.
8.
BensonGeorge Charles SumnerMaaranenSteven AHeslopAlan. 1978. Political Corruption in America. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.
9.
BlaisAndréBodetMarc André. How Do Voters Form Expectatoins about the Parties’ Chances of Winning the Election?Social Science Quarterly. 2006; 87(3): 477–493.
10.
BoboLawerence. Whites’ Opposition to Busing: Symbolic Racism or Realistic Group Conflict?Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1983; 45(6): 1196–1210.
11.
BokayevBaurzhanNauryzbekMadinaDavletbayevaZhuldyzDussipovYerkinRysbekovaZhanarTorebekovaZulfiya. 2023. “Factors Driving Individual Perceptions of Quotidian Corruption: Evidence from Kazakhstan.” Public Integrity25 (4): 380–398.
12.
BoteroSandra, et al. Says Who? An Experiment on Allegations of Corruption and Credibility of Sources. Political Research Quarterly. 2015; 68(3): 493–504.
13.
BoylanRichard TLongCheryl X. 2003. “Measuring Public Corruption in the American States: a Survey of State House Reporters.” State Politics & Policy Quarterly3 (4): 420–438.
14.
CaillierJames. 2010. “Citizen Trust, Political Corruption, and Voting Behavior: Connecting the Dots.” Politics & Policy38 (5): 1015–1035.
15.
CampbellAngus A.ConversePhilip E.MillerWarren E.StokesDonald E.. The American Voter. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 1960.
16.
CanacheDamarysAllisonMichael E. 2005. “Perceptions of Political Corruption in Latin American Democracies.” Latin American Politics and Society47 (3): 91–111.
17.
CanacheDamarysCawveyMatthewHayesMatthewMondakJeffery J.. 2019. “Who Sees Corruption? the Bases of Mass Perceptions of Political Corruption in Latin America.” Journal of Politics in Latin America11 (2): 133–160.
18.
ChoiEunjungWooJongseok. Political Corruption, Economic Performance, and Electoral Outcomes: A Cross-national Analysis. Contemporary Politics. 2010; 16(3): 249–262.
19.
CitrinJackGreenDonald Philip. 1986. “Presidential Leadership and the Resurgence of Trust in Government.” British Journal of Political Science16 (4): 431–453.
20.
Crowder-MeyerMelodyGadarianShana KushnerTrounstineJessica. Voting Can Be Hard, Information Helps. Urban Affairs Review. 2020; 56(1): 124–153.
21.
Delli CarpiniMichael XKeeterScott. What Americans Know About Politics and Why It Matters. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1996.
22.
DepkenCarig A, IILaFountainCourtney L. 2006. “Fiscal Consequences of Public Corruption: Empirical Evidence from State Bond Ratings.” Public Choice126 (1-2): 75–85.
23.
DolanKathleenMcKeownBruceCarlsonJames M. 1988. “Popular Conceptions of Political Corruption: Implications for the Empirical Study of Political Ethics.” Corruption and Reform3: 3–24.
24.
DincerOguzhanJohnstonMichael. Political Culture and Corruption Issues in State Politics: A New Measure of Corruption Issues and A Test of Relationships to Political Culture. Publius: The Journal of Federalism. 2017; 47(1): 131–148.
25.
EtzioniAmitai. 2014. “Political Corruption in the United States: a Design Draft.” PS: Political Science & Politics47 (1): 141–144.
26.
FacklerTimLinTse-min. 1995. “Political Corruption and Presidential Elections, 1929-1992.” Journal of Politics57 (4): 971.
27.
FischleMark. 2000. “Mass Response to the Lewinsky Scandal: Motivated Reasoning or BayesianUpdating?” Political Psychology21 (1): 135–159.
28.
FisherPatrick. 2018. Demographic Gaps in American Political Behavior. New York: Routledge.
29.
GoelRajeev KNelsonMichael A.. 2011. “Measures of Corruption and Determinants of US Corruption.” 12(2): 155-176.
30.
HakhverdianArmenMayneQuinton. 2012. “Institutional Trust, Education, and Corruption: a Micro-macro Interactive Approach.” Journal of Politics74 (3): 739–750.
31.
HeidemanAmanda. Race, Place, and Descriptive Representation: What Shapes Trust Toward Local Government?Representation. 2020; 56(2): 195–213.
32.
HolbrookThomasDolanKathleen. Knowing versus Caring: The Role of Affect and Cognition in Political Perceptions. Political Psychology. 2001; 22(1): 27–44.
33.
HolbrookThomas M.2002. “Presidential Campaigns and the Knowledge Gap.” Political Communication19 (4): 437–454.
34.
HolbrookThomas M.HeidemanAmanda J.. 2022. “Straight to the (Revenue) Source: Contextual and Individual-Level Determinants of Attitudes toward Local Taxes.” American Politics Research50 (2): 157–172.
35.
HolbrookThomasHeidemanAmandaWeinschenkAaron. 2023. “Objective Conditions, Political Knowledge, and Perceptions of Electoral Competition in US Mayoral Elections.” Social Science Quarterly104 (6): 1282–1294.
36.
HolbrookThomas M.WeinschenkAaron C.. 2020a. “Are Perceptions of Local Conditions Rooted in Reality? Evidence from Two Large-Scale Local Surveys.” American Politics Research48 (4): 467–474.
37.
HolbrookThomas M.WeinschenkAaron C.. 2020b. “Information, Political Bias, and Public Perceptions of Local Conditions in US Cities.” Political Research Quarterly73 (1): 221–236.
38.
JeritJenniferBarabasJasonBolsenToby. 2006. “Citizens, Knowledge, and the Information Environment.” American Journal of Political Science50 (2): 266–282.
39.
JohnsonNoel DLaFountainCourtney LYamarikSteven. 2011. “Corruption Is Bad for Growth (Even in the United States).” Public Choice147 (3-4): 377–393.
40.
JohnstonMichael. 1982. Political Corruption and Public Policy in America. Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole Publishing Company.
41.
JohnstonMichael. 2006. “From Thucydides to Mayor Daley: Bad Politics, and a Culture of Corruption?” PS: Political Science & Politics39 (4): 809–812.
42.
KlašnjaMarkoTuckerJoshua. The Economy, Corruption, and the Vote: Evidence from Experiments in Sweden and Moldova. Electoral Studies. 2013; 32(31): 536–543.
43.
KonstantinidisIannisXezonakisGeorgios. Sources of Tolerance Towards Corrupted Politicians in Greece: The Role of Trade Offs and Individual Benefits. Crime, Law and Social Change. 2013; 60: 549–563.
44.
KwakNojin. 1999. “Revisiting the Knowledge Gap Hypothesis: Education, Motivation, and Media Use.” Communication Research26 (4): 385–413.
45.
LauRichardRedlawskDavid. Voting Correctly. American Political Science Review. 1997; 91(3): 585–598.
46.
LayCeleste. 2015. “The Salience of Schools and Safety: Explaining Mayoral Voting Among Women in Cities.” In Minority Voting in the United States, edited by KreiderKyle L.BaldinoThomas J., 168–189. Santa Barbara, CA: Praeger/ABC-Clio,).
47.
LayJ.Celeste.TyburskiMichael.D.. 2017. “The Buck Stops with the Education Mayor: Mayoral Control and Local Test Scores in U.S. Urban Mayoral Elections.” Politics and Policy45: 964–1002.
48.
McCannJames A.LawsonChappell. 2006. “Presidential Campaigns and the Knowledge Gap in Three Transitional Democracies.” Political Research Quarterly59 (1): 13–22.
49.
MeffertMichael, et al. More Than Wishful Thinking: Causes and Consequences of Voters’ Electoral Expecations about Parties and Coalitions. Electoral Studies. 2011; 30(4): 804–815.
50.
MeierKenneth J.HolbrookThomas M.. 1992. “I Seen My Opportunities and I Took 'Em: Political Corruption in the American States.” Journal of Politics54 (1): 135–155.
51.
MitchellDavid T.CampbellNoel D.. 2009. “Corruption's Effect on Business Venturing within the United States.” 68(5): 1135-1152.
52.
MooreDavid W.1987. “Political Campaigns and the Knowledge-Gap Hypothesis.” Public Opinion Quarterly51 (2): 186–200.
53.
MoskowitzDaniel. 2021. “Local News, Information, and the Nationalization of U.S. Elections.” American Political Science Review115 (1): 114–129.
54.
PetersJohnWelchSusan. 1980. “The Effects of Charges of Corruption on Voting Behavior in Congressional Elections.” American Political Science Review74 (3): 697–708.
55.
PopkinSamuel. The Reasoning Voter: Communication and Persuasion in Presidential Campaigns. 2nd ed. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 1994.
56.
RedlawskDavid P.McCannJames A.. 2005. “Popular Interpretations of ‘Corruption’ and Their Partisan Consequences.” Political Behavior27 (3): 261–283.
57.
Ross ArnoldJason. 2012. “Political Awareness, Corruption Perceptions and Democratic Accountability in Latin America.” Acta Politica47 (1): 67–90.
58.
SchlesingerThomasMeierKenneth J. 2002 In Variations in Corruption Among the American States, edited by CorruptionPoliticalHeidenheimerArnoldJohnstonMichael, 627–644. New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers.
59.
SeligsonMitchell A.2002. “The Impact of Corruption on Regime Legitimacy: a Comparative Study of Four Latin American Countries.” Journal of Politics64 (2): 408–433.
60.
ShakerLee. 2012. “Local Political Knowledge and Assessments of Political Competence.” Public Opinion Quarterly76 (3): 525–537.
61.
SolazH.De VriesC. E.De GeusR. A.. 2019. “In-group Loyalty and the Punishment of Corruption.” Comparative Political Studies52 (6): 896–926.
62.
StrebMatthew J.ClarkApril K.. 2010. “The Public and Political Corruption.” In Corruption and American Politics, edited by GenoveseMichaelFarrar-MyersVictoria A, 275–304. Amherst, NY: Cambria Press.
63.
TeslerMichaelSearsDavid O.. 2010. Obama's Race: The 2008 Election and the Dream of a Post-racial America. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
64.
TajfelH. 1970. “Experiments in Intergroup Discrimination.” Scientific American223 (5): 96–103.
65.
TyburskiM.EganP.SchneiderA.. 2020. “Deep Determinants of Corruption? A Subnational Analysis of Resource Curse Dynamics in American States.” Political Research Quarterly73 (1): 111–125.
66.
WelchSusanHibbingJohn. 1997. “The Effects of Charges of Corruption on Voting Behavior in Congressional Elections, 1982-1990.” Journal of Politics59 (1): 226–239.
67.
WhiteIsmail K.LairdChryl N.. 2020. Steadfast Democrats: How Social Forces Shape Black Political Behavior. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
68.
WilliamsLinda. White/Black Perceptions of the Electability of Black Political Candidates. National Black Political Science Review. 1990; 2(1): 45–64.
69.
WoodsNeal D.2008. “The Policy Consequences of Political Corruption: Evidence from State Environmental Programs.” Social Science Quarterly89 (1): 258–271.
70.
ZallerJohn. 1991. “Information, Values, and Opinion.” The American Political Science Review85 (4): 1215–1237.
71.
ZechmeisterElizabeth JZizumbo-ColungaDaniel. 2013. “The Varying Political Toll of Concerns about Corruption in Good versus Bad Economic Times.” Comparative Political Studies46 (10): 1190–1218.
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.
