DO ECONOMIC SHOCKS MATTER? THE EFFECT OF THE ECONOMY ON PRESIDENTIAL SUPPORT

For decades researchers argued that individual’s political attitudes, perceptions and evaluations were explained by early political socialization principles or, on the other hand, they react to different stimuli from the environment. Party identification or changes in the state of the national economy turned into the biggest predictors or explanatory independent variables when analyzing individual’s political behavior. Campbell et al (1960) coined the term ``perceptual screen” when describing the effect that party identification had over the individuals. 60 years later, different authors argued in the same fashion. ``Partisans ignore or deflect information that is inconsistent with their party” (Green et al (2002)) or ``Political party is a crucial mediating force” (Lewis-Beck et al 2008). I use mediation analysis to introduce for the first time a systematic measurement of whether this mediation effect exists and how important is it. Bringing together individual’s responses to nationally representative surveys and national macroeconomic performance indicators, I start analyzing the US from 1980 to 2016. I expand the scope of my dissertation findings incorporating 17 Latin American countries from 2006 to 2016 and I finalize analyzing Chile from 1900 to 2017. My dissertation put together a multilevel regressions approach analyzing more than 235,000 cases across different political, economic and cultural institutions. I found that changes and shocks in the economy affect directly how individuals evaluate the state of the economy, not being mediated significantly by party identification. Party identification mediates economic perceptions on what I defined as the ``Responsibility attribution stage”, or when individuals reward or punish the incumbent due to their economic management. Almost 30% of the presidential support is mediated by party identification when attributing responsibility to the incumbent in the US. Only 15% of the attribution is mediated by party identification in Latin America and 9% in the Chilean case. I also found important differences respect to the effect of party identification once one considers if the party is in office or in the opposition. I argue that this is explained by different political institutions but also because individuals evaluate variables different than macroeconomic performances