Political information and retrospective voting

References

• Anderson, Chrisopher J. (2000). ‘Economic Voting and Political Context: A Comparative Perspective’, Electoral Studies, 19:2-3, 151–70.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bengtsson, Åsa (2004). ‘Economic Voting: The Effect of Political Context, Volatility and Turnout on Voters’ Assignment of Responsibility’, European Journal of Political Research, 43:5, 749–67.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brader, Ted, and Joshua Tucker (2012). ‘Following the Party’s Lead: Party Cues, Policy Opinion, and the Power of Partisanship in Three Multiparty Systems’, Comparative Politics, 44:4, 403–20.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brambor, Thomas, William R. Clark, and Matt Golder (2006). ‘Understanding Interaction Models: Improving Empirical Analyses’, Political Analysis, 14:1, 63–82.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Campbell, Angus, Philip Converse, Warren E. Miller, and Donald Stokes (1960). The American Voter. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
   Google Scholar
• CSES (2015a). The Comparative Study of Electoral Systems (www.cses.org). CSES MODULE 2 FULL RELEASE [dataset]. December 15, 2015 version.
   Google Scholar
• CSES (2015b). The Comparative Study of Electoral Systems (www.cses.org). CSES MODULE 3 FULL RELEASE [dataset]. December 15, 2015 version.
   Google Scholar
• CSES (2017). The Comparative Study of Electoral Systems (www.cses.org). CSES MODULE 4 FOURTH ADVANCE RELEASE [dataset]. April 11, 2017 version.
   Google Scholar
• Dassonneville, Ruth, and Michael S. Lewis-Beck (2017). ‘Rules, Institutions and the Economic Vote: Clarifying Clarity of Responsibility’, West European Politics, 40:3, 534–59.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• de Vries, Catherine E., and Nathalie Giger (2014). ‘Holding Governments Accountable? Individual Heterogeneity in Performance Voting’, European Journal of Political Research, 53:2, 345–62.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Duch, Raymond (2001). ‘A Developmental Model of Heterogeneous Economic Voting in New Democracies’, American Political Science Review, 95:4, 895–910.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ecker, Alejandro, Konstantin Glinitzer, and Thomas M. Meyer (2016). ‘Corruption Performance Voting and the Electoral Context’, European Political Science Review, 8:3, 333–54.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Enders, Craig K., and Davood Tofighi (2007). ‘Centering Predictor Variables in Cross-Sectional Multilevel Models: A New Look at an Old Issue’, Psychological Methods, 12:2, 121–38.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Evans, Geoffrey, and Robert Andersen (2006). ‘The Political Conditioning of Economic Perceptions’, Journal of Politics, 68:1, 194–207.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fiorina, Morris P. (1981). Retrospective Voting in American National Elections. New Haven: Yale University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gelman, Andrew, and Jennifer Hill (2007). Data Analysis Using Regression and Multilevel/Hierarchical Models. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Godbout, Jean-François, and Éric Bélanger (2007). ‘Economic Voting and Political Sophistication in the United States: A Reassessment’, Political Research Quarterly, 60:3, 541–54.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gomez, Brad T., and Matthew J. Wilson (2001). ‘Political Sophistication and Economic Votingin the American Electorate: A Theory of Heterogeneous Attribution’, American Journal of Political Science, 45:4, 899–914.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gomez, Brad T., and Matthew J. Wilson (2003). ‘Causal Attribution and Economic Voting in American Congressional Elections’, Political Research Quarterly, 56:3, 271–82.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gomez, Brad T., and Matthew J. Wilson (2006). ‘Cognitive Heterogeneity and Economic Voting’, American Journal of Political Science, 50:1, 127–45.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gomez, Brad T., and Matthew J. Wilson (2007). ‘Economic Voting and Political Sophistication: Defending Heterogeneous Attribution’, Political Research Quarterly, 60:3, 555–8.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goren, Paul (1997). ‘Political Expertise and Issue Voting in Presidential Elections’, Political Research Quarterly, 50:2, 387–412.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Healy, Andrew, and Neil Malhotra (2013). ‘Retrospective Voting Reconsidered’, Annual Review of Political Science, 16:1, 285–306.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heisig, Jan P., and Merlin Schaeffer (2019). ‘Why You Should Always Include a Random Slope for the Lower-Level Variable Involved in a Cross-Level Interaction’, European Sociological Review, 35:2, 258–79.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hobolt, Sarah, James Tilley, and Susan Banducci (2013). ‘Clarity of Responsibility: How Government Cohesion Conditions Performance Voting’, European Journal of Political Research, 52:2, 164–87.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jaccard, James, and Rob Turrisi (2003). Interaction Effects in Multiple Regression. Sage University Papers on Quantitative Applications in the Social Sciences, 07-072. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Jessee, Stephen A. (2017). ‘“Don’t Know” Responses, Personality, and the Measurement of Political Knowledge’, Political Science Research and Methods, 5:4, 711–31.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kam, Cindy D. (2005). ‘Who Toes the Party Line? Cues, Values, and Individual Differences’, Political Behavior, 27:2, 163–82.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Key, Valdimer O. (1966). The Responsible Electorate: Rationality in Presidential Voting 1936–1960. Cambridge: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lewis-Beck, Michael S., and Mary Stegmaier (2000). ‘Economic Determinants of Electoral Outcomes’, Annual Review of Political Science, 3:1, 183–219.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lewis-Beck, Michael S., and Mary Stegmaier (2013). ‘The VP-Function Revisited: A Survey of the Literature on Vote and Popularity Functions after over 40 Years’, Public Choice, 157:3-4, 367–58.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Luskin, Robert C. (2002). ‘From Denial to Extenuation (and Finally Beyond): Political Sophistication and Citizen Performance’, in James H. Kuklinski (ed.), Thinking about Political Psychology. New York: Cambridge University Press, 217–52.
   Google Scholar
• Manin, Bernard (1995). Principes du Gouvernement Représentatif. Paris: Calmann-Lévy.
   Google Scholar
• Marthaler, Sally (2008). ‘The Paradox of the Politically-Sophisticated Partisan: The French Case’, West European Politics, 31:5, 937–59.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mood, Carina (2010). ‘Logistic Regression: Why We Cannot Do What We Think We Can Do, and What We Can Do about It’, European Sociological Review, 26:1, 67–82.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nadeau, Richard, Richard G. Niemi, and Antoine Yoshinaka (2002). ‘A Cross-National Analysis of Economic Voting: Taking account of the Political Context across Time and Nations’, Electoral Studies, 21:3, 403–23.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nannestad, Peter, and Martin Paldam (1994). ‘The VP-Function: A Survey of the Literature on Vote and Popularity Functions after 25 Years’, Public Choice, 79:3-4, 213–45.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Powell, Bingham G., and Guy D. Whitten (1993). ‘A Cross-National Analysis of Economic Voting: Taking Account of the Political Context’, American Journal of Political Science, 37:2, 391–414.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Przeworski, Adam, Susan C. Stokes, and Bernard Manin (eds.) (1999). Democracy, Accountability, and Representation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Royed, Terry J., Kevin M. Leyden, and Stephen A. Borrelli (2000). ‘Is ‘Clarity of Responsibility’ Important for Economic Voting? Revisiting Powell and Whitten’s Hypothesis’, British Journal of Political Science, 30:4, 669–84.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schmitt, Hermann, Sarah B. Hobolt, Sebastian A. Popa, and Eftichia Teperoglou (2016). European Parliament Election Study 2014, Voter Study, First Post-Election Survey. GESIS Data Archive, Cologne. ZA5160 Data file Version 4.0.0.
   Google Scholar
• Stevenson, Randolph T., and Raymond Duch (2013). ‘The Meaning and Use of Subjective Perceptions in Studies of Economic Voting’, Electoral Studies, 32:2, 305–20.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stiers, Dieter (2019a). ‘Beyond the Distinction between Incumbency and Opposition: Retrospective Voting at the Level of Political Parties’, Party Politics, 25:6, 805–16.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stiers, Dieter (2019b). ‘Retrospective Voting on the Party Level: An Icelandic Test’, Scandinavian Political Studies, 42:1, 73–83.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stiers, Dieter, and Ruth Dassonneville (forthcoming). ‘Retrospective Voting and the Polarization of Available Alternatives’, Canadian Journal of Political Science, in press.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Strøm, Kaare (2000). ‘Delegation and Accountability in Parliamentary Democracies’, European Journal of Political Research, 37:3, 261–90.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van Egmond, Marcel, Wouter van der Brug, Sarah Hobolt, Mark Franklin, and Eliyahu V. Sapir (2013). European Parliament Election Study 2009, Voter Study. GESIS Data Archive, Cologne. ZA5055 Data file Version 1.1.0,
   Google Scholar
• Whitten, Guy D., and Harvey D. Palmer (1999). ‘Cross-National Analyses of Economic Voting’, Electoral Studies, 18:1, 49–67.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar