Skip to main content
Log in

How does government performance influence political support?

  • Published:
Political Behavior Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Much of the literature on political support is of little use to policy makers or those attempting to understand ordinary politics, because the concepts guiding research have focused attention on extreme cases of little relevance. If we are to interpret political support in terms of regime stability, then it is seldom at issue in advanced democratic societies; but if it indicates only approval for authorities, then direct measures of popularity do the job better. This paper works toward an empirical conceptualization of political support intermediate along that continuum by investigating the relationship between support orientations and the public's evaluation of governmental policy performance. Empirical hypotheses are drawn from an elaboration of the policy-relevant aspects of political support, and of the support-relevant aspects of policy evaluations. These hypotheses are tested against the American public's responses to the government's management of the economy, and they reveal several patterns useful to interpreting changes in the level of political support.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abramson, Paul R., and Finifter, Ada W. (1981). On the meaning of political trust: new evidence from items introduced in 1978.American Journal of Political Science 25: 297–307.

    Google Scholar 

  • Almond, Gabriel A., and Verba, Sidney (1963).The Civic Culture. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Almond, Gabriel A., and Verba, Sidney (eds.). (1980).The Civic Culture Revisited. Boston: Little, Brown.

    Google Scholar 

  • American Institute of Public Opinion (1972–1977).The Gallup Opinion Index, various issues.

  • Bach, G. L., and Stephenson, J. B. (1974). Inflation and the redistribution of wealth.Review of Economics and Statistics 61: 1–13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bailey, Stephen K. (1950).Congress Makes a Law. New York: Columbia University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baloyra, Enrique A. (1979). Criticism, cynicism, and political evaluation: a Venezuelan example.American Political Science Review 73: 987–1002.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bardach, Eugene (1980). Implementation studies and the study of implements. Prepared for the Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, Denver.

  • Blinder, Alan S. (1979).Economic Policy and the Great Stagflation. New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blinder, Alan S., and Esaki, H. Y. (1978). Macroeconomic activity and income distribution in the postwar United States.Review of Economics and Statistics 60: 604–609.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brody, Richard A., and Sniderman, Paul M. (1977). From life space to polling place: the relevance of personal concerns for voting behavior.British Journal of Political Science 7: 337–360.

    Google Scholar 

  • Browning, Robert, and Browning, Jacqueline (1983).Public Finance and the Price System. New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Caddell, Patrick (1979). Crisis of confidence: I. trapped in a downward spiral.Public Opinion 2: 9ff.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cameron, David R. (1984). The politics and economics of the business cycle. In Thomas Ferguson and Joel Rogers (eds.),The Political Economy, pp. 237–63. Armonk, N.Y.: M. E. Sharpe.

    Google Scholar 

  • Center for Political Studies, National Science Foundation Board of Overseers (1980–1986). Memoranda to the political behavior research community.

  • Chappell, Henry W., and Keech, William R. (1985). A new view of political accountability for economic performance.American Political Science Review 79: 10–27.

    Google Scholar 

  • Citrin, Jack (1974). Comment: the political relevance of trust in government.American Political Science Review 68: 973–988.

    Google Scholar 

  • Citrin, Jack, McClosky, Herbert, Shanks, J. Merrill, and Sniderman, Paul M. (1975). Personal and political sources of political alienation.British Journal of Political Science 5: 1–31.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conover, Pamela Johnston (1985). Studying group influence: what do the measures mean? Prepared for the Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, New Orleans.

  • Converse, Philip E. (1964). The nature of belief systems in mass publics. In David E. Apter (ed.),Ideology and Discontent. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Converse, Philip E. (1975). Public opinion and voting behavior. In Fred I. Greenstein and Nelson Polsby (eds.),The Handbook of Political Science, Vol. 4. Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cronbach, Lee J. (1971). Test validation. In R. L. Thorndike (ed.),Educational Measurement, pp. 443–507. Washington, D.C.: American Council on Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dahl, Robert A. (1956).A Preface to Democratic Theory. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dahl, Robert A. (1966).Political Oppositions in Western Democracies. New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dahl, Robert A. (1982).Dilemmas of Pluralist Democracy: Autonomy vs. Control. New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Easton, David (1965).A Systems Analysis of Political Life. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Easton, David (1975). A re-assessment of the concept of political support. British Journal of Political Science 5: 435–457.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eckstein, Otto (1978).The Great Recession. Amsterdam: North-Holland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Entman, Robert M., Prothro, James W., and Sharp, E. F. (1974).Watergate and Political Trust: A Panel Study. New Haven, Conn.: Yale University, Institute for Social and Policy Studies.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eulau, Heinz, and Lewis-Beck, Michael (eds.) (1985).Economic Conditions and Electoral Outcomes: The United States and Western Europe. New York: Agathon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feldman, Stanley (1983). The measurement and meaning of trust in government.Political Methodology 9: 341–354.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feldman, Stanley (1985).Economic self-interest and the vote: evidence and meaning. In Heinz Eulau and Michael Lewis-Beck (eds.),Economic Conditions and Electoral Outcomes: The United States and Western Europe, pp. 144–166. New York: Agathon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fiorina, Morris P. (1981).Retrospective Voting in American Politics. New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hibbs, Douglas A., Jr. (1975).Political Parties and Macroeconomic Policy. Cambridge: MIT Center for International Studies.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hibbs, Douglas A., Jr. (1979). The mass public and macroeconomic policy: the dynamics of public opinion toward unemployment and inflation.American Journal of Political Science 23: 705–731.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hibbs, Douglas A., Jr. (1982a). The dynamics of political support for American presidents among occupational and partisan groups.American Journal of Political Science 26: 312–332.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hibbs, Douglas A., Jr. (1982b). Economic outcomes and political support for British governments among occupational classes: a dynamic analysis.American Political Science Review 76: 259–279.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hibbs, Douglas A., Jr. (1985). Inflation, political support and macroeconomic policy. In Leon S. Lindberg and Charles S. Maier (eds.),The Politics of Inflation and Economic Stagnation, pp. 175–195. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keech, William R. (1980). Elections and macroeconomic policy optimization.American Journal of Political Science 24: 345–367.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kiewiet, D. Roderick, and Rivers, Douglas (1985). A retrospective on retrospective voting. In Heinz Eulau and Michael S. Lewis-Beck (eds.),Economic Conditions and Electoral Outcomes, pp. 207–231. New York: Agathon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kramer, Gerald (1971). Short-term fluctuations in U.S. voting behavior, 1896–1964.American Political Science Review 65: 131–145.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lipset, Seymour Martin, and Schneider, William (1983).The Confidence Gap. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, Arthur (1974a). Political issues and trust in government: 1964–1970.American Political Science Review 68: 951–972.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, Arthur (1974b). Rejoinder to comment by Jack Citrin: political discontent or ritualism?American Political Science Review 68: 989–1001.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, Warren E., and Jukam, Thomas O. (1977). On the meaning of political support.American Political Science Review 71: 1561–1595.

    Google Scholar 

  • Musgrave, Richard A., and Musgrave, Peggy B. (1973).Public Finance in Theory and Practice. New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nordhaus, William (1975). The political business cycle.Review of Economic Studies 42: 169–190.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peffley, Mark (1985). The voter as juror: attributing responsibility for economic conditions. In Heinz Eulau and Michael Lewis-Beck (eds.), pp. 187–206.Economic Conditions and Electoral Outcomes. New York: Agathon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pye, Lucian W. (1971). The legitimacy crisis. In Leonard Binder et al. (eds.),Crises and Sequences in Political Development, Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Robinson, R., and Kelley, J. (1979). Class as conceived by Marx and Dahrendorf: Effects on income inequality and politics in the United States and Great Britain.American Sociological Review 44: 38–58.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosenberg, Morris (1968).The Logic of Survey Analysis. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Salamon, Lester (1981). Re-thinking political management: third party government and the changing forms of government action.Public Policy 29 (3): 255–275.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sniderman, Paul M. (1981).A Question of Loyalty. Berkeley: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sniderman, Paul M., Neuman, W. Russell, Citrin, Jack, McClosky, Herbert, and Shanks, J. Merrill (1975). Stability of support for the political system: the initial impact of Watergate.American Politics Quarterly 3: 437–457.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stigler, George (1973). Aggregate economic conditions and national elections.American Economic Review. 64: 160–167.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, Dennis (1970).The Democratic Citizen. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tufte, Edward R. (1978).Political Control of the Economy. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vanneman, Reeve D. (1980). U.S. and British perceptions of class.American Journal of Sociology 85: 769–790.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weatherford, M. Stephen. (1984). Economic “stagflation” and public support for the political system.British Journal of Political Science 14: 187–205.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weber, Max (1958).From Max Weber: Essays in Sociology, H. H. Gerth and C. Wright Mills, trans. and eds. New York: Oxford University Press. (First published in 1946.)

    Google Scholar 

  • Wheaton, Blair, Muthen, B., Alwin, D. F., and Summers, G. F. (1977). Assessing reliability and stability in panel models. In D. R. Heise (ed.),Sociological Methodology, pp. 84–136. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wright, Erik O., and Perrone, Luca (1977). Marxist class categories and income inequality.American Sociological Review 42: 32–55.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Weatherford, M.S. How does government performance influence political support?. Polit Behav 9, 5–28 (1987). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00987276

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00987276

Keywords

Navigation