Skip to main content
Log in

Presidential prototypes

  • Published:
Political Behavior Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The American public expresses considerable consensus on those qualities of character and performance indispensable to a modern president. Contrary to expectations, however, such conceptions of an ideal president (or presidential prototypes) generally failed to provide standards by which actual presidential candidates were evaluated. Across five complementary tests, qualities that citizens thought important for an ideal president counted no more heavily in their evaluations of presidential hopefuls than did qualities thought less important—with one consistent and striking exception. Conceptions of an ideal president did set the standards by which the incumbent president was evaluated, and quite powerfully so. In the final section of the paper, we provide several interpretations of these results, suggest how public conceptions of an ideal president are acquired, and speculate about processes of presidential appraisal.

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

  • Barber, J. D. (1971). “The Presidency: What Americans Want.”The Center Magazine, Jan./Feb. 2–6.

  • Brody, R. A. (1980). “Public Evaluations and Expectations and the Future of the Presidency.” Manuscript, Stanford University.

  • Brody, R. A., and B. I. Page (1975). “The Impact of Events on Presidential Popularity: The Johnson and Nixon Administrations.” In A. Wildavsky (Ed.),Perspectives on the Presidency. Boston: Little Brown.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cantor, N., and W. Mischel (1979). “Categorization Processes in the Perception of People.” In L. Berkowitz (Ed.),Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, Vol. 12. New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cronin, T. (1974) “The Textbook Presidency and Political Science.” In S. Bach and G. T. Sulzner (Eds.),Perspectives on the Presidency. Lexington, MA: Heath.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dawes, R. M. (1976). “Shallow Psychology.” In J.S. Carroll and J. W. Payne (Eds.),Cognition and Social Behavior. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Downs, A. (1957).An Economic Theory of Democracy. New York: Harper.

    Google Scholar 

  • Edelman, M. (1964).The Symbolic Uses of Politics. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fiorina, M. P. (1981).Retrospective Voting in American National Elections. New Haven: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gans, H. J. (1979).Deciding What's News. New York: Pantheon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greenstein, F. I. (1978). “Change and Continuity in the Modern Presidency.” In A. King (Ed.),The New American Political System. Washington, D.C.: American Enterprise Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heclo, H. (1977).Studying the Presidency. Report to the Ford Foundation.

  • Hodgson, G. (1980).All Things to All Men. New York: Simon & Schuster.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kagay, M. R., and G. A. Caldeira (1975). “I like the Looks of His Face: Elements of Electoral Choice, 1952–1972.” Delivered at the Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, San Francisco, CA.

  • Kernell, S. (1978). “Explaining Presidential Popularity.”American Political Science Review, 72:506–522.

    Google Scholar 

  • Key, V. O., Jr. (1966).The Responsible Electorate. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kinder, D. R. (1981). “Presidents, Prosperity, and Public Opinion.”Public Opinion Quarterly, in press.

  • Kinder, D. R., R. P. Abelson, and S. T. Fiske (1979).Developmental Research on Candidate Instrumentation: Results and Recommendations. Report available from Center for Political Studies, ISR, The University of Michigan.

  • Kinder, D. R., R. P. Abelson, S. T. Fiske, and M. D. Peters (1979). “Impressions of Political Leaders.” Paper prepared for 87th Annual Meeting of the American Psychological Association.

  • Kinder, D. R., and D. R. Kiewiet (1979). “Economic Discontents and Political Behavior: The Role of Personal Grievances and Collective Economic Judgments in Congressional Voting.”American Journal of Political Science, 23:495–527.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kinder, D. R., and D. R. Kiewiet. “Sociotropic Politics.”British Journal of Political Science, In press.

  • Kramer, G. H. (1971). “Short-term Fluctuations in U.S. Voting Behavior, 1896–1964.”American Political Science Review, 65:131–143.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kumar, M. J., and M. B. Grossman (1980). “Images of the White House in the Media.” Presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, Washington, D.C.

  • Miller, A. H., and W. E. Miller (1976). “Ideology in the 1972 Election: Myth or Reality.”American Political Science Review, 70:832–849.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, A. H., and W. E. Miller (1977). “Partisanship and Performance: ‘Rational’ Choice in the 1976 Presidential Election.” Presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association.

  • Monroe, K. R. (1979). “Econometric Analysis of Electoral Behavior: A Critical Review.”Political Behavior, 1:137–174.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mueller, J. E. (1970). “Presidential Popularity from Truman to Johnson.”American Political Science Review, 64:18–34.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nimmo, D., M. Mansfield, and J. Curry (1978). “Persistence and Change in Candidate Images.” in G. F. Bishop, R. G. Meadow, and M. Jackson-Beck (Eds.),The Presidential Debates. New York: Praeger.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nimmo, D., and R. L. Savage (1976).Candidates and their Images. Pacific Palisades, CA: Goodyear.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nisbett, R. E., and T. D. Wilson (1977). “Telling More Than We Can Know: Verbal Reports on Mental Processes.”Psychological Review, 84:231–259.

    Google Scholar 

  • Page, B. I. (1978).Choices and Echoes in Presidential Elections. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sears, D. O. (1975). “Political Socialization.” In F. I. Greenstein and N. Polsby (Eds.),Handbook of Political Science, Vol. 2. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sigel, R. S. (1966). “Image of the American Presidency.”Midwest Journal of Political Science 10:123–137.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, E. R., and F. D. Miller (1978). “Limits on Perception of Cognitive Processes: A Reply to Nisbett and Wilson.”Psychological Review, 85:355–362.

    Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, S. E., and J. Crocker (1981). “Schematic Bases of Social Information Processing.” In E. T. Higgens, C. A. Herman, and M. P. Zanna (Eds.)Social Cognition. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Wayne, S. J. (1980). “Expectations of the President.” Presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, Washington, DC.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Kinder, D.R., Peters, M.D., Abelson, R.P. et al. Presidential prototypes. Polit Behav 2, 315–337 (1980). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00990172

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00990172

Keywords

Navigation