首席决定者?公众为何以及如何夸大总统的权力

IF 1.5 2区 社会学 Q2 POLITICAL SCIENCE Political Research Quarterly Pub Date : 2023-12-12 DOI:10.1177/10659129231218676
Scott Clifford, D. J. Flynn, Brendan Nyhan, K. Rhee
{"title":"首席决定者?公众为何以及如何夸大总统的权力","authors":"Scott Clifford, D. J. Flynn, Brendan Nyhan, K. Rhee","doi":"10.1177/10659129231218676","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"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.","PeriodicalId":51366,"journal":{"name":"Political Research Quarterly","volume":"43 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Decider in Chief? Why and How the Public Exaggerates the Power of the Presidency\",\"authors\":\"Scott Clifford, D. J. Flynn, Brendan Nyhan, K. Rhee\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/10659129231218676\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"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.\",\"PeriodicalId\":51366,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Political Research Quarterly\",\"volume\":\"43 2\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-12-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Political Research Quarterly\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/10659129231218676\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"POLITICAL SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Political Research Quarterly","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10659129231218676","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

民主问责制要求公民准确地将功过归于领导人和机构。然而,公民倾向于简化政治,将国家人格化为领导者,并据此归功于领导者。通过一项专家调查和一项跨越两届政府的五波公共面板调查,我们对比了公众和专家对总统权力的看法。我们证明,相对于学者专家,公众夸大了总统的权力,而最夸大总统权力的人更倾向于将责任归咎于总统。然而,党派对总统职位控制权的变化会改变党派对总统权力的看法。最后,我们发现了一些暗示性证据,表明在突出的政策失败之后,人们的信念也会发生类似的转变。这些结果提供了迄今为止最直接的证据,表明公民普遍夸大了总统的影响力和控制力,但随着时间的推移,这些信念会随着事件的发生而改变。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Decider in Chief? Why and How the Public Exaggerates the Power of the Presidency
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.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Political Research Quarterly
Political Research Quarterly POLITICAL SCIENCE-
CiteScore
3.60
自引率
4.80%
发文量
109
期刊介绍: Political Research Quarterly (PRQ) is the official journal of the Western Political Science Association. PRQ seeks to publish scholarly research of exceptionally high merit that makes notable contributions in any subfield of political science. The editors especially encourage submissions that employ a mixture of theoretical approaches or multiple methodologies to address major political problems or puzzles at a local, national, or global level. Collections of articles on a common theme or debate, to be published as short symposia, are welcome as well as individual submissions.
期刊最新文献
Disinformation and Regime Survival. A Deepening/Widening Tradeoff? Evidence from the GATT and WTO Ethnicity and Response to Internal Environmental Migrants in the United States Countering “Fake News” Through Public Education and Advertisements: An Experimental Analysis Deceptively Stable? How the Stability of Aggregate Abortion Attitudes Conceals Partisan Induced Shifts
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1