IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bpd/articl/v2y2019i1jbpa.21.47.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Trust in institutions: Narrowing the ideological gap over the federal budget

Author

Listed:
  • Kim-Lee Tuxhorn

    (University of Calgary)

  • John W. D'Attoma

    (University of Exeter)

  • Sven Steinmo

    (University of Colorado)

Abstract

Do liberals and conservatives who trust the government have more similar preferences regarding the federal budget than liberals and conservatives who do not? Prior research has shown that the ideological gap over spending increases and tax cuts narrows at high levels of trust in government. We extend this literature by examining whether the dampening effect of trust operates when more difficult budgetary decisions (spending cuts and tax increases) have to be made. Although related, a tax increase demands greater material and ideological sacrifice from individuals than tax cuts. The same logic can be applied to support for spending cuts. We test the trust-as-heuristic hypothesis using measures of revealed budgetary preferences from a population-based survey containing an embedded budget simulation. Our findings show that trusting liberals and conservatives share similar preferences toward spending cuts and tax increases, adding an important empirical addendum to a theory based on sacrificial costs.

Suggested Citation

  • Kim-Lee Tuxhorn & John W. D'Attoma & Sven Steinmo, 2019. "Trust in institutions: Narrowing the ideological gap over the federal budget," Journal of Behavioral Public Administration, Center for Experimental and Behavioral Public Administration, vol. 2(1).
    • Handle: RePEc:bpd:articl:v:2:y:2019:i:1:jbpa.21.47
    DOI: 10.30636/jbpa.21.47
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journal-bpa.org/index.php/jbpa/article/download/47/25
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.30636/jbpa.21.47?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Darren W. Davis & Brian D. Silver, 2004. "Civil Liberties vs. Security: Public Opinion in the Context of the Terrorist Attacks on America," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 48(1), pages 28-46, January.
    2. Lowery, David & Sigelman, Lee, 1981. "Understanding the Tax Revolt: Eight Explanations," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 75(4), pages 963-974, December.
    3. Shlomo Benartzi & Richard Thaler, 2007. "Heuristics and Biases in Retirement Savings Behavior," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 21(3), pages 81-104, Summer.
    4. Thomas J. Rudolph & Jillian Evans, 2005. "Political Trust, Ideology, and Public Support for Government Spending," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 49(3), pages 660-671, July.
    5. Lenz, Gabriel & Sahn, Alexander, 2017. "Achieving Statistical Significance with Covariates and without Transparency," MetaArXiv s42ba, Center for Open Science.
    6. Dmitriy Poznyak & Bart Meuleman & Koen Abts & George F. Bishop, "undated". "Trust in American Government: Longitudinal Measurement Equivalence in the ANES, 1964-2008," Mathematica Policy Research Reports 793d3fc1192d44d4afdba8fa7, Mathematica Policy Research.
    7. Alan M. Jacobs & J. Scott Matthews, 2017. "Policy Attitudes in Institutional Context: Rules, Uncertainty, and the Mass Politics of Public Investment," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 61(1), pages 194-207, January.
    8. Hetherington, Marc J., 1999. "The Effect of Political Trust on the Presidential Vote, 1968–96," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 93(2), pages 311-326, June.
    9. Dmitriy Poznyak & Bart Meuleman & Koen Abts & George Bishop, 2014. "Trust in American Government: Longitudinal Measurement Equivalence in the ANES, 1964–2008," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 118(2), pages 741-758, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Olivier Jacques & David Weisstanner, 2022. "The Micro-Foundations of Permanent Austerity: Income Stagnation and the Decline of Taxability in Advanced Democracies," LIS Working papers 839, LIS Cross-National Data Center in Luxembourg.
    2. Michael J. Nelson & Christopher Witko, 2020. "Government reputational effects of COVID-19 public health actions: A job opportunity evaluation conjoint experiment," Journal of Behavioral Public Administration, Center for Experimental and Behavioral Public Administration, vol. 3(1).
    3. Caroline J. Tolbert & Christopher Witko & Cary Wolbers, 2019. "Public Support for Higher Taxes on the Wealthy: California’s Proposition 30," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 7(2), pages 351-364.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Sedef Turper & Kees Aarts, 2017. "Political Trust and Sophistication: Taking Measurement Seriously," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 130(1), pages 415-434, January.
    2. Joseph A Hamm & Corwin Smidt & Roger C Mayer, 2019. "Understanding the psychological nature and mechanisms of political trust," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(5), pages 1-20, May.
    3. T. W. G. Meer & E. Ouattara, 2019. "Putting ‘political’ back in political trust: an IRT test of the unidimensionality and cross-national equivalence of political trust measures," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 53(6), pages 2983-3002, November.
    4. Louis Fucilla, 2021. "Does the Bureaucracy Affect Trust in Government? Evidence from Aggregate Public Opinion," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 102(1), pages 69-82, January.
    5. Kukreja, Rolly, 2024. "Does representation affect trust in political institutions?: Evidence from redistricting in India," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 179(C).
    6. Ji, Chengyuan & Jiang, Junyan & Zhang, Yujin, 2024. "Political trust and government performance in the time of COVID-19," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 176(C).
    7. Kuhika Gupta & Joseph T. Ripberger & Hank C. Jenkins‐Smith & Carol L. Silva, 2020. "Exploring Aggregate vs. Relative Public Trust in Administrative Agencies that Manage Spent Nuclear Fuel in the United States," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 37(4), pages 491-510, July.
    8. Kao, Yu-Hui & Sapp, Stephen G., 2022. "The effect of cultural values and institutional trust on public perceptions of government use of network surveillance," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 70(C).
    9. Jaeyoung Lim & Kuk-Kyoung Moon, 2021. "Can Political Trust Weaken the Relationship between Perceived Environmental Threats and Perceived Nuclear Threats? Evidence from South Korea," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(18), pages 1-13, September.
    10. Mitchell, O.S. & Piggott, J., 2016. "Workplace-Linked Pensions for an Aging Demographic," Handbook of the Economics of Population Aging, in: Piggott, John & Woodland, Alan (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Population Aging, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 0, pages 865-904, Elsevier.
    11. Marija Džunić & Nataša Golubović & Srđan Marinković, 2020. "Determinants Of Institutional Trust In Transition Economies: Lessons From Serbia," Economic Annals, Faculty of Economics and Business, University of Belgrade, vol. 65(225), pages 135-162, April – J.
    12. Kenneth D. Nguyen & Heather Rosoff & Richard S. John, 2017. "Valuing Equal Protection in Aviation Security Screening," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 37(12), pages 2405-2419, December.
    13. Beshears, John & Choi, James J. & Laibson, David & Madrian, Brigitte C., 2011. "Behavioral economics perspectives on public sector pension plans," Journal of Pension Economics and Finance, Cambridge University Press, vol. 10(2), pages 315-336, April.
    14. Tam, Leona & Dholakia, Utpal M., 2011. "Delay and duration effects of time frames on personal savings estimates and behavior," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 114(2), pages 142-152, March.
    15. Marc Peter Radke & Manuel Rupprecht, 2021. "Household Wealth: Low-Yielding and Poorly Structured?," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 14(3), pages 1-40, March.
    16. Dan Goldhaber & Cyrus Grout, 2016. "Pension Choices and the Savings Patterns of Public School Teachers," Education Finance and Policy, MIT Press, vol. 11(4), pages 449-481, Fall.
    17. Jason Wei Jian Ng & Santha Vaithilingam & Grace H. Y. Lee & Gary J. Rangel, 2022. "Life Satisfaction and Incumbent Voting: Examining the Mediating Effect of Trust in Government," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 23(6), pages 2947-2967, August.
    18. Irina Georgieva & Tella Lantta & Jakub Lickiewicz & Jaroslav Pekara & Sofia Wikman & Marina Loseviča & Bevinahalli Nanjegowda Raveesh & Adriana Mihai & Peter Lepping, 2021. "Perceived Effectiveness, Restrictiveness, and Compliance with Containment Measures against the Covid-19 Pandemic: An International Comparative Study in 11 Countries," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(7), pages 1-15, April.
    19. Jacobs, Heiko & Müller, Sebastian & Weber, Martin, 2014. "How should individual investors diversify? An empirical evaluation of alternative asset allocation policies," Journal of Financial Markets, Elsevier, vol. 19(C), pages 62-85.
    20. Anne Marie Jeannet, 2017. "The Rational Public? Internal Migration and Collective Opinion about the European Union," Working Papers 103, "Carlo F. Dondena" Centre for Research on Social Dynamics (DONDENA), Università Commerciale Luigi Bocconi.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Budget preferences; Budget policy; Tax preferences; Spending preferences; Trust in government; Interactive budget simulation;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D91 - Microeconomics - - Micro-Based Behavioral Economics - - - Role and Effects of Psychological, Emotional, Social, and Cognitive Factors on Decision Making
    • J15 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demographic Economics - - - Economics of Minorities, Races, Indigenous Peoples, and Immigrants; Non-labor Discrimination
    • Z00 - Other Special Topics - - General - - - General
    • D90 - Microeconomics - - Micro-Based Behavioral Economics - - - General

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bpd:articl:v:2:y:2019:i:1:jbpa.21.47. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sebastian Jilke (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://journal-bpa.org .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.