In this article, I offer a review of the uses and findings regarding public issue salience in the political science literature, with a focus on electoral behaviour. I argue that in spite of the increased use of issue salience in recent years, with impressive explanatory results, the concept of issue salience remains underspecified and, at times, contradictory and that its antecedents remain relatively unknown. This is likely to have led to serious shortcomings when attempting to explain recent changes to party systems and electoral results in advanced democracies.
σAdamsJ (1997) Condorcet Efficiency and the Behavioral Model of the Vote. The Journal of Politics59: 1252–1263.
2.
υAldrichJHMcKelveyRD (1977) A Method of Scaling with Applications to the 1968 and 1972 Presidential Elections. The American Political Science Review71: 111–130.
3.
σAlvarezRMNaglerJ (1998) When Politics and Models Collide: Estimating Models of Multiparty Elections. American Journal of Political Science42 (1): 55–96.
4.
σAnsolabehereSPuyMS (2018) Measuring Issue-Salience in Voters Preferences. Electoral Studies51: 103–114.
5.
ArceneauxKKolodnyR (2009) The Effect of Grassroots Campaigning on Issue Preferences and Issue Salience. Journal of Elections, Public Opinion and Parties19 (3): 235–249.
6.
υBartleJLaycockS (2012) Telling More Than They Can Know? Does the Most Important Issue Really Reveal What Is Most Important to Voters?Electoral Studies31: 679–688.
7.
BehrRLIyengarS (1985) Television News, Real-World Cues, and Changes in the Public Agenda. Public Opinion Quarterly49: 38–57.
σBernsteinRA (1995) Directing Electoral Appeals Away from the Center: Issue Positions and Issue Salience. Political Research Quarterly48: 479–505.
10.
BoningerDSKrosnickJABerentMK, et al. (1995) The Causes and Consequences of Attitude Importance. In: PettyREKrosnickJA (eds) Attitude Strength: Antecedents and Consequences. Hillsdale, MI: Lawrence Erlbaum, pp.159–189.
11.
BudgeI (2015) Issue Emphases, Saliency Theory and Issue Ownership: A Historical and Conceptual Analysis. West European Politics38: 761–777.
12.
ButlerDStokesD (1969) Political Change in Britain: Forces Shaping Electoral Choice. London: Macmillan.
13.
•CareyTEBrantonRPMartinez-EbersV (2014) The Influence of Social Protests on Issue Salience among Latinos. Political Research Quarterly67: 615–627.
14.
ChongDDruckmanJN (2007) Framing Theory. Annual Review of Political Science10: 103–126.
15.
•CiukDJYostBA (2016) The Effects of Issue Salience, Elite Influence, and Policy Content on Public Opinion. Political Communication33: 328–345.
16.
*•ClarkN (2014) Explaining Low Turnout in European Elections: The Role of Issue Salience and Institutional Perceptions in Elections to the European Parliament. Journal of European Integration36: 339–356.
17.
ClarkeHDKornbergAScottoTJ, et al. (2012) Political Choices in Hard Times: Voting in the 2010 U.S. House Elections. Journal of Elections, Public Opinion and Parties22 (2): 139–165.
18.
CronenVE (1973) Belief, Salience, Media Exposure and Summation Theory. The Journal of Communication23: 86–94.
19.
•DannevigHHovelsrudGK (2016) Understanding the need for adaptation in a natural resource dependent community in Northern Norway: Issue salience, knowledge and values. Climate Change135: 261–275.
20.
•DellisA (2009) The Salient Issue of Issue Salience. Journal of Public Economic Theory11: 203–231.
21.
DownsA (1957) An Economic Theory of Political Action in a Democracy. Journal of Political Economy65 (2): 135–150.
22.
*EdwardsGCMitchellWWelchR (1995) Explaining Presidential Approval: The Significance of Issue Salience. American Journal of Political Science39: 108–134.
23.
*EinsiedelEFSalomoneKLSchneiderFP (1984) Crime: Effects of Media Exposure and Personal Experience on Issue Salience. Journalism Quarterly61: 131–136.
24.
ErbringLGoldenbergENMillerAH (1980) Front-Page News and Real-World Cues: A New Look at Agenda-Setting by the Media. American Journal of Political Science24: 16–49.
25.
Eurobarometer (2018) TNS Opinion and Social. Brussels: GESIS Data Archive.
26.
σFeldSLMerrillSMIIIGrofmanB (2014) Modeling the Effects of Changing Issue Salience in Two-Party Competition. Public Choice158: 465–482.
27.
υFournierPBlaisANadeauR, et al. (2003) Issue Importance and Performance Voting. Political Behavior25: 51–67.
28.
*FoxDLSchofieldJW (1989) Issue Salience, Perceived Efficacy and Perceived Risk: A Study of the Origins of Anti-Nuclear War Activity. Journal of Applied Social Psychology19 (10): 805–827.
29.
*FranklinMNWlezienC (1997) The Responsive Public: Issue Salience, Policy Change, and Preferences for European Unification. Journal of Theoretical Politics9: 347–363.
30.
GeerJG (1991) Do Open-Ended Questions Measure ‘Salient’ Issues?The Public Opinion Quarterly55 (3): 360–370.
31.
GentzkowMShapiroJM (2010) What Drives Media Slant? Evidence from U.S. Daily Newspapers. Econometrica78 (1): 35–71.
32.
*GivensTLuedtkeA (2005) European Immigration Policies in Comparative Perspective: Issue Salience, Partisanship and Immigrant Rights. Comparative European Politics3: 1–22.
33.
*GlazerALohmannS (1999) Setting the Agenda: Electoral Competition, Commitment of Policy, and Issue Salience. Public Choice99 (3–4): 377–394.
34.
υGreenJHoboltSB (2008) Owning the Issue Agenda: Party Strategies and Vote Choices in British Elections. Electoral Studies27: 460–476.
35.
GrynaviskiJDCorriganBE (2006) Specification Issues in Proximity Models of Candidate Evaluation (with Issue Importance). Political Analysis14 (4): 393–420.
36.
HattonT (2016) Public Opinion on Immigration in Europe: Preference Versus Salience. IZA DP No. 10838. Bonn: Institute of Labour Economics.
37.
*•HayesD (2008) Does the Messenger Matter? Candidate-Media Agenda Convergence and Its Effects on Voter Issue Salience. Political Research Quarterly61: 134–146.
38.
•HayesTJBishinBG (2012) Issue Salience, Subconstituency Politics, and Legislative Resolution. Congress and the Presidency39 (2): 133–159.
39.
HinckleyBHofstetterRKesselJ (1974) Information and the Vote: A Comparative Election Study. American Political Research2 (2): 131–158.
40.
*IyengarS (1979) Television News and Issue Salience: A Reexamination of the Agenda-Setting Hypothesis. American Politics Quarterly7: 395–416.
41.
JenningsWWlezienC (2011) Distinguishing between Most Important Problems and Issues. Public Opinion Quarterly75: 545–555.
42.
*•JohnsR (2010) Measuring Issue Salience in British Elections: Competing Interpretations of ‘Most Important Issue’. Political Research Quarterly63: 143–158.
43.
σKiousisSStrömbäckJMcDevittM (2015) Influence of Issue Decision Salience on Vote Choice: Linking Agenda Setting, Priming, and Issue Ownership. International Journal of Communication9: 3347–3368.
44.
KrosnickJA (1988) The Role of Attitude Importance in Social Evaluation: A Study of Policy Preferences, Presidential Candidate Evaluations, and Voting Behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology55: 196–210.
45.
KrosnickJA (1990) Government Policy and Citizen Passion: A Study of Issue Publics in Contemporary America. Political Behaviour12: 59–92.
46.
KurellaAS (2014) Causes and Consequences of Heterogenous Issue Salience Among the Electorate. In: ECPR General Conference, Glasgow, 3–6 September.
47.
•υKwonHY (2008) A Dynamic Analysis of Partisan Voting: The Issue Salience Effect of Unemployment in South Korea. Electoral Studies27: 518–532.
48.
*LavineHSullivanJLBorgidaE, et al. (1996) The Relationship of National and Personal Issue Salience to Attitude Accessibility on Foreign and Domestic Policy Issues. Political Psychology17: 293–316.
49.
•LazarusJ (2013) Issue Salience and Bill Introduction in the House and Senate. Congress and the Presidency40 (3): 215–229.
50.
MarkusGBConversePE (1979) A Dynamic Simulatenous Equation Model of Electoral Choice. American Political Science Review73 (4): 1055–1070.
51.
MeguidB (2010) Party Competition between Unequals: Strategies and Electoral Fortunes in Western Europe. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
52.
*•MellonJ (2013) Where and When Can We Use Google Trends to Measure Issue Salience?PS: Political Science & Politics46: 280–290.
53.
*•MellonJ (2014) Internet Search Data and Issue Salience: The Properties of Google Trends as a Measure of Issue Salience. Journal of Elections, Public Opinion and Parties24: 45–72.
54.
MillerJM (2007) Examining the Mediators of Agenda Setting: A New Experimental Paradigm Reveals the Role of Emotions. Political Psychology28 (6): 689–717.
55.
•MillerJMKrosnickJAFabrigarLR (2017) The Origins of Policy Issue Salience. In: KrosnickJAChiangI-CAStarkTH (eds) Political Psychology: New Explorations. London: Routledge, pp.125–177.
56.
•NeundorfAAdamsJ (2018) The Micro-Foundations of Party Competition and Issue Ownership: The Reciprocal Effects of Citizens Issue Salience and Party Attachments. British Journal of Political Science48 (2): 385–406.
57.
*σNiemiRGBartelsLM (1985) New Measures of Issue Salience: An Evaluation. The Journal of Politics47: 1212–1220.
58.
•OppermanK (2010) The concept of issue salience in foreign policy analysis: Delineating the scope conditions of theoretical approaches in the field. Paper prepared for presentation at the SGIR 7th Pan-European Conference, 9–11 September 2010, Stockholm, Sweden.
59.
•OppermannKHenrikeV (2008) Issue Salience and the Domestic Legitimacy Demands of European Integration: The Cases of Britain and Germany. European Integration Online Papers12(2).
60.
OstromCWSimonDM (1985) Promise and Performance: A Dynamic Model of Presidential Popularity. The American Political Science Review79: 334–358.
61.
•PedrazaFINicholsVCLeBeónAMW (2017) Cautious Citizenship: The Deterring Effect of Immigration Issue Salience on Health Care Use and Bureaucratic Interactions Among Latino US Citizens. Journal of Health Politics, Policy and Law42 (5): 925–960.
62.
*RePassDE (1971) Issue Salience and Party Choice. American Political Science Review65: 389–400.
63.
RikerWH (1993) Agenda Formation. Ann Arbor, MI: Michigan University Press.
64.
*RobertsMWantaWDzwoT-H, et al. (2002) Agenda Setting and Issue Salience Online. Communication Research29: 452–465.
65.
*SalwenMB (1988) Effect of Accumulation of Coverage on Issue Salience in Agenda Setting. Journalism Quarterly65 (1): 100–108.
66.
SamuelsonPA (1938) A Note on the Pure Theory of Consumers’ Behaviour. Economica: New Series5 (17): 61–71.
67.
ScharkoxMVogelgasangJ (2011) Measuring the Public Agenda Using Search Engine Queries. International Journal of Public Opinion Research23 (1): 104–113.
68.
•SpendzharovaAVersluisE (2013) Issue Salience in the European Policy Process: What Impact on Transposition?Journal of European Public Policy20: 1499–1516.
69.
StokesDE (1963) Spatial Models of Party Competition. American Political Science Review57 (2): 368–377.
70.
•VergeerMFransesPH (2016) Live Audience Responses to Live Televised Election Debates: Time Series Analysis of Issue Salience and Party Salience on Audience Behavior. Information, Communication & Society19: 1390–1410.
71.
υVisserPSKrosnickJASimmonsJP (2003) Distinguishing the Cognitive and Behavioral Consequences of Attitude Importance and Certainty. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology39: 118–141.
72.
WalgraveSLefevereJ (2013) Ideology, Salience and Complexity: Determinants of Policy Issue Incongruence Between Voters and Parties. Journal of Elections, Public Opinion and Parties23 (4): 456–483.
73.
WalgraveSTreschALefevereJ (2015) The Conceptualisation and Measurement of Issue Ownership. West European Politics38 (4): 778–796.
74.
*WeaverD (1991) Issue Salience and Public Opinion: Are There Consequences of Agenda-Setting?International Journal of Public Opinion Research3: 53–68.
75.
*WeissertCS (1991) Issue Salience and State Legislative Effectiveness. Legislative Studies Quarterly16 (4): 509–520.
76.
WlezienC (2005) On the Salience of Political Issues: The Problem With the ‘Most Important Problem’. Electoral Studies24 (4): 555–579.
77.
YangZJ (2016) Altruism During Ebola: Risk Perception, Issue Salience, Cultural Cognition, and Information Processing. Risk Analysis36 (6): 1079–1089.
