Scholarship on political knowledge recognizes a difference between static and surveillance knowledge: the former includes rarely changing facts such as features of constitutions and institutions, while the latter can include the identities of officeholders and policy-relevant facts. Although some scholars have argued for the relevance of surveillance knowledge, one overlooked feature of surveillance knowledge is that less attentive citizens can have information about the political world that is not precisely “right” or “wrong” but rather, outdated. For example, in answering a question identifying the holder of a prominent political position, one might wrongly name the prior officeholder, either because one did not notice the office had changed hands, or because the habit of associating that person with that office interfered with the ability to correctly answer the question in real time. In this paper, we explore this phenomenon, with an eye toward understanding how individuals who possess outdated knowledge (or respond to surveys in a manner consistent with possessing outdated knowledge) compare to individuals who get these questions completely right or completely wrong. Drawing on a survey of eleven large and medium-sized U.S. cities with political knowledge questions tailored to each respondent’s state and city, we explore correct, incorrect, and outdated identifications of key actors at three levels of government: Speaker of the House, governor, and mayor. In particular, we focus on the temporal dimension: what are the direct and conditional effects of the length of time since an office has changed hands?
AlvarezR. M.NaglerJ. (1995). Economics, issues and the perot candidacy: Voter choice in the 1992 presidential election. American Journal of Political Science, 39(3), 714–744. https://doi.org/10.2307/2111651
2.
AnziaS. F. (2014). Timing and Turnout: How Off-Cycle Elections Favor Organized Groups. University of Chicago Press.
BaddeleyA.LogieR.Sergio BressiS. D. S.SpinnlerH. (1986). Dementia and working memory. The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology. A, Human experimental psychology, 38(4), 603–618. https://doi.org/10.1080/14640748608401616
5.
BarabasJ.JeritJ.PollockW.RaineyC. (2014). The question(s) of political knowledge. American Political Science Review, 108(4), 840–855.
6.
BennettS. E. (1988). Know-nothings’ revisited: The meaning of political ignorance today. Social Science Quarterly, 69, 476–490.
7.
BeyleT. L. (2007). Gubernatorial power: The institutional power ratings for the 50 governors of the United States. University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.
8.
BradyD. W.FerejohnJ.ParkerB. (2022). Cognitive political economy: A growing partisan divide in economic perceptions. American Politics Research, 50(1), 3–16. https://doi.org/10.1177/1532673x211032107
9.
BucchianeriP. (2020). Party competition and coalitional stability: Evidence from American local government. American Political Science Review, 114(4), 1055–1070. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0003055420000386
10.
BullockJ. G.RaderK. (2022). Response options and the measurement of political knowledge. British Journal of Political Science, 52(3), 1418–1427. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0007123421000120
11.
BurgessM.MakseT. (2025). Replication Data for “Anachro-Knowledge: Officeholder Change and Outdated Political Knowledge”. https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/A2IPUH, Harvard Dataverse.
12.
ChaffeeS. H.KanihanS. F. (1997). Learning about politics from the mass media. Political Communication, 14(4), 421–430. https://doi.org/10.1080/105846097199218
CliffordS.JeritJ. (2016). Cheating on political knowledge questions in online surveys: An assessment of the problem and solutions. Public Opinion Quarterly, 80(4), 858–887. https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfw030
15.
CohenC. J.LuttigM. (2020). Reconceptualizing political knowledge: Race, ethnicity, and carceral violence. Perspectives on Politics, 18(3), 805–818. https://doi.org/10.1017/s1537592718003857
16.
ConverseP. E. (1964). The nature of belief systems in mass publics. In ApterD. (Ed.), Ideology and discontent (pp. 206–261). Free Press.
17.
CookA. E.GuéraudS. (2005). What have we been missing? The role of general world knowledge in discourse processing. Discourse Processes, 39(2–3), 265–278. https://doi.org/10.1080/0163853x.2005.9651683
18.
DarrJ. P.HittM. P.DunawayJ. L. (2021). Home style opinion: How local newspapers can slow polarization. Cambridge University Press.
DeBellM. (2013). Harder than it looks: Coding political knowledge on the ANES. Political Analysis, 21(4), 393–406. https://doi.org/10.1093/pan/mpt010
21.
Delli CarpiniM.KeeterS. (1996). What Americans know about politics and why it matters. Yale University Press.
22.
DolanK. (2011). Do women and men know different things? Measuring gender differences in political knowledge. The Journal of Politics, 73(1), 97–107. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0022381610000897
23.
DownsA. (1957). An economic theory of democracy. Harper & Row.
24.
EckerU. K. H.LewandowskyS.OberauerK. (2014). Removal of information from working memory: A specific updating process. Journal of Memory and Language, 74, 77–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2013.09.003
25.
EckerU. K. H.OberauerK.LewandowskyS. (2014). Working memory updating involves item-specific removal. Journal of Memory and Language, 74, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2014.03.006
26.
FazioL. K.BrashierN. M.PayneB. K.MarshE. J. (2015). Knowledge does not protect against illusory truth. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 144(5), 993–1002. https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0000098
27.
FazioL. K.RandD. G.PennycookG. (2019). Repetition increases perceived truth equally for plausible and implausible statements. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 26(5), 1705–1710. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-019-01651-4
28.
GibsonJ. L.CaldeiraG. A. (2009). Knowing the supreme court? A reconsideration of public ignorance of the high court. The Journal of Politics, 71(2), 429–441. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0022381609090379
GrahamM. H. (2024). Detecting and deterring information search in online surveys. American Journal of Political Science, 68(4), 1315–1334. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajps.12786
31.
GrahamM. H.SinghS. (2024). An outbreak of selective attribution: Partisanship and blame in the COVID-19 pandemic. American Political Science Review, 118(1), 423–441. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0003055423000047
32.
HayesD.LawlessJ. L. (2021). News Hole: The Demise of Local Journalism and Political Engagement. Cambridge University Press.
33.
HeseltineM.BarnehlH.WojcieszakM. (2024). Partisan temporal selective news avoidance: Evidence from online trace data. American Journal of Political Science.
34.
HollanderB. A. (2014). The role of media use in the recall versus recognition of political knowledge. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 58(1), 97–113. https://doi.org/10.1080/08838151.2013.875019
JinR.CloudtA.ChoiS.JiaZ.KlarS. (2023). The policy blame game: How polarization distorts democratic accountability across the local, state, and federal level. State Politics and Policy Quarterly, 23(1), 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1017/spq.2022.21
37.
JohnsonH. M.SeifertC. M. (1994). Sources of the continued influence effect: When misinformation in memory affects later inferences. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 20(6), 1420–1436. https://doi.org/10.1037//0278-7393.20.6.1420
38.
KendeouP.SmithE. R.O’BrienE. J. (2013). Updating during reading comprehension: Why causality matters. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 39(3), 854–865. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0029468
39.
KrebsT.PelisseroJ. P. (2010). Urban managers and public policy: Do institutional arrangements influence decisions to initiate policy?Urban Affairs Review, 45(3), 391–411. https://doi.org/10.1177/1078087409342693
40.
KrosnickJ. A. (1991). Response strategies for coping with the cognitive demands of attitude measures in surveys. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 5(3), 213–236. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.2350050305
41.
KrosnickJ. A.HolbrookA. L.BerentM. K.CarsonR. T.HanemannW. M.KoppR. J.MitchellR. C. (2002). The impact of ‘No Opinion’ response options on data quality: Non-attitude reduction or an invitation to satisfice?Public Opinion Quarterly, 66(3), 371–403.
42.
KuklinskiJ. H.QuirkP. J.JeritJ.SchwiederD.RichR. F. (2000). Misinformation and the currency of Democratic citizenship. The Journal of Politics, 62(3), 790–816. https://doi.org/10.1111/0022-3816.00033
LodgeM.TaberC. S. (2013). The rationalizing voter. Cambridge University Press.
46.
LuskinR. C. (1987). Measuring political sophistication. American Journal of Political Science, 31(4), 856–899. https://doi.org/10.2307/2111227
47.
LyonsJ.JaegerW. P.WolakJ. (2013). The roots of citizens’ knowledge of state politics. State Politics and Policy Quarterly, 13(2), 183–202. https://doi.org/10.1177/1532440012464878
48.
MillerM. (2019). Who knows more about politics? A dual explanation for the gender gap. American Politics Research, 47(1), 174–188.
49.
MillerM. K.OrrS. K. (2008). Experimenting with a “Third Way” in political KnowledgeEstimation. Public Opinion Quarterly, 72(4), 768–780. https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfn057
50.
MondakJ. J. (2001). Developing valid knowledge scales. American Journal of Political Science, 45(1), 224–238. https://doi.org/10.2307/2669369
51.
MondakJ. J.AndersonM. R. (2004). The knowledge gap: A reexamination of Gender- based differences in political knowledge. The Journal of Politics, 66(2), 224–238. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2508.2004.00161.x
52.
MottaM. P.CallaghanT. H.SmithB. (2017). Looking for Answers: Identifying Search Behavior and Improving Knowledge-Based Data Quality in Online Surveys. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 29, 575–603.
NeumanW. R. (1986). The paradox of mass politics: Knowledge and opinion in the American electorate. Harvard University Press.
55.
NuamahS.OgorzalekT. (2021). Close to home: Place-based mobilization in racialized contexts. American Political Science Review, 115(3), 757–774. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0003055421000307
56.
O’BrienE.CookA.GuéraudS. (2010). Accessibility of outdated information. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 36(4), 979–991. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0019763
57.
O’BrienE. J.MyersJ. L. (1999). Text comprehension: A view from the bottom up. In Narrative comprehension, causality, and coherence (pp. 41–60). Routledge.
58.
PérezE. O. (2015). Mind the gap: Why large group deficits in political knowledge emerge—and what to Do about them. Political Behavior, 37(4), 933–954.
59.
PriceV.ZallerJ. (1993). Who gets the news? Alternative measures of news reception and their implications for research. Public Opinion Quarterly, 57(2), 133–164. https://doi.org/10.1086/269363
PriorM.LupiaA. (2008). Money, time, and political knowledge: Distinguishing quick recall and political learning skills. American Journal of Political Science, 52(1), 169–183. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5907.2007.00306.x
62.
RobisonJ. (2015). Who knows? Question format and political knowledge. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 27(1), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1093/ijpor/edu019
63.
ShakerL. (2012). Local political knowledge and assessments of citizen competence. Public Opinion Quarterly, 76(3), 525–537. https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfs018
64.
StanovichK. E.WestR. F. (2000). Individual differences in reasoning: Implications for the rationality debate?Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 23(5), 645–665. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0140525x00003435
65.
StolleD.GidengilE. (2010). What do women really know? A gendered analysis of varieties of political knowledge. Perspectives on Politics, 8(1), 93–109. https://doi.org/10.1017/s1537592709992684
66.
StyleH.JeritJ. (2020). Does it matter if respondents look up answers to political knowledge questions?Public Opinion Quarterly, 84(3), 760–775. https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfaa038
67.
TedinK.MurrayR. (1979). Public awareness of congressional representatives: Recall versus recognition. American Politics Quarterly, 7(4), 509–517. https://doi.org/10.1177/1532673x7900700408
68.
TourangeauR.RipsL. J.RasinskiK. (2000). The psychology of survey response. Cambridge University Press.
69.
TrivediM. A.SchmitzT. W.RiesM. L.HessT. M.FitzgeraldM. E.AtwoodC. S.RowleyH. A.AsthanaS.SagerM. A.JohnsonS. C. (2008). fMRI activation during episodic encoding and metacognitive appraisal across the lifespan: Risk factors for Alzheimer’s disease. Neuropsychologia, 46(6), 1667–1678. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2007.11.035
70.
TsaiT. H.LinC. C. (2017). Modeling guessing components in the measurement of political knowledge. Political Analysis, 25(4), 483–504. https://doi.org/10.1017/pan.2017.21
71.
ValentinoN. A.HutchingsV. L.BanksA. J.DavisA. K. (2008). Is a worried citizen a good citizen? Emotions, political information seeking, and learning via the internet. Political Psychology, 29(2), 247–273. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9221.2008.00625.x
72.
van ErkelP. F.AelstP. (2021). Why don’t we learn from social media? Studying effects of and mechanisms behind social media news use on general surveillance political knowledge. Political Communication, 38(4), 407–425. https://doi.org/10.1080/10584609.2020.1784328
VidottoS.Weitz-ShapiroR.WintersM. S. (2025). Political knowledge in the context of changing institutions. Political Research Quarterly, 78(1), 87–101. https://doi.org/10.1177/10659129241289600
75.
WolakJ. (2022). Political knowledge. In Handbook on politics and public opinion (pp. 314–327). Edward Elgar.
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.
