Skip to main content
Log in

Issue Importance and Performance Voting

  • Published:
Political Behavior Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Issue importance mediates the impact of public policy issues on electoral decisions. Individuals who consider that an issue is important are more likely to rely on their attitudes toward that issue when evaluating candidates and deciding for whom to vote. The logic behind the link between issue importance and issue voting should translate to a link between issue importance and performance voting. Incumbent performance evaluations regarding an issue should have a stronger impact on the vote choice of individuals who find that issue important. The analysis demonstrates that there is a significant interaction between performance evaluations and issue importance. People concerned about an issue assign more weight to their evaluations of the government's performance on that issue when making up their mind.

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, Aldrich, John, and Rohde, David (1999). Continuity and Change in the 1996 Election. Washington: CQ Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berent, Matthew K., and Krosnick, Jon A. (1995). The relation between political attitude importance and knowledge structure. In Milton Lodge and Kathleen McGraw (eds.), Political Judgment: Structure and Process, pp. 91–109. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brody, Richard (1991). Assessing the President: The Media, Elite Opinion, and Public Support. Stanford: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Butler, David, and Stokes, Donald (1969). Political Change in Britain. London: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Duch, Raymond M. (2001). A developmental model of heterogeneous economic voting in new democracies. American Political Science Review 95: 895–910.

    Google Scholar 

  • Edwards, George C., III (1990). Presidential Approval: A Sourcebook. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Flanigan, William, and Zingale, Nancy (1994). Political Behavior of the American Electorate. Washington: CQ Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fournier, Patrick (2000). Heterogeneity in Political Decision-Making: The Nature, Extent, Sources, Dynamics, and Consequences of Interpersonal Differences in Coefficient Strength. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of British Columbia, Vancouver.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greene, William H. (1997). Econometric Analysis. Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hinckley, Barbara, Hofstetter, Richard, and Kessel, John (1974). Information and the vote: a comparative election study. American Politics Quarterly 2: 131–158.

    Google Scholar 

  • Iyengar, Shanto, and Kinder, Donald R. (1987). News that Matters. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Iyengar, Shanto, Peters, Mark, and Kinder, Donald R. (1982). Experimental demonstration of the not-so-minimal consequences of television news programs. American Political Science Review 76: 848–858.

    Google Scholar 

  • Iyengar, Shanto, Kinder, Donald, Peters, Mark D., and Krosnick, Jon A. (1984). The evening news and presidential evaluations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 46: 778–787.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnston, Richard, Blais, Andre´, Gidengil, Elisabeth, and Nevitte, Neil (1996). The Challenge of Direct Democracy: The 1992 Canadian Referendum. Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • King, Gary (1989). Unifying Political Methodology: The Likelihood Theory of Statistical Inference. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krosnick, Jon A. (1988). The role of attitude importance in social evaluation: a study of policy preferences, presidential candidate evaluation, and voting behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 55: 196–210.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krosnick, Jon A. (1990). Government policy and citizen passion: a study of issue publics in contemporary america. Political Behavior 12: 59–92.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lau, Richard R. (1985). Two explanations for negativity effects in political behavior. American Journal of Political Science 29: 119–138.

    Google Scholar 

  • Markus, Gregory B., and Converse, Philip E. (1979). A dynamic simultaneous equation model of electoral choice. American Political Science Review 73: 1055–1070.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCombs, Maxell, and Shaw, Donald (1972). The agenda-setting function of the mass media. Public Opinion Quarterly 36: 176–187.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, Joanne M., and Krosnick, Jon A. (1996). News media impact on the ingredients of presidential evaluations: a program of research on the priming hypothesis. In Diana C. Mutz, Paul M. Sniderman, and Richard A. Brody (eds), Political Persuasion and Attitude Change, pp. 79–99. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, Joanne M., and Krosnick, Jon A. (2000). News media impact on the ingredients of presidential evaluations: politically knowledgeable citizens are guided by a trusted source. American Journal of Political Science 44: 301–315.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mueller, John (1973). War, Presidents, and Public Opinion. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Neustadt, Richard (1960). Presidential Power. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nevitte, Neil, Blais, Andre´, Gidengil, Elisabeth, and Nadeau, Richard (2000). Unsteady State: The 1997 Canadian Federal Election. Toronto: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Niemi, Richard G., and Bartels, Larry M. (1985). New measures of issue salience: an evaluation. Journal of Politics 47: 1212–1220.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rabinowitz, George, Prothro, James W., and Jacoby, William (1982). Salience as a factor in the impact of issues on candidate evaluation. Journal of Politics 42: 41–63.

    Google Scholar 

  • Repass, David R. (1971). Issue salience and party choice. American Political Science Review 65: 389–400.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rivers, Douglas (1988). Heterogeneity in models of electoral choice. American Journal of Political Science 32: 737–757.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rose, Richard, and McAllister, Ian (1990). The Loyalties of Voters: A Lifetime Learning Model. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schuman, Howard, Ludwig, J., and Krosnick, Jon A. (1986). The perceived threat of nuclear war, salience, and open questions. Public Opinion Quarterly 50: 519–536.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shapiro, Michael J. (1969). Rational political man: a synthesis of economic and socialpsychological perspective. American Political Science Review 63: 1106–1119.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sniderman, Paul M., Brody, Richard A., and Tetlock, Philip E. (1991). Reasoning and Choice: Explorations in Political Psychology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Fournier, P., Blais, A., Nadeau, R. et al. Issue Importance and Performance Voting. Political Behavior 25, 51–67 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022952311518

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022952311518

Navigation