IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/zbw/espost/300885.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How Voters Respond to Presidential Assaults on Checks and Balances: Evidence from a Survey Experiment in Turkey

Author

Listed:
  • Şaşmaz, Aytuğ
  • Yagci, Alper H.
  • Ziblatt, Daniel

Abstract

Why do voters support executive aggrandizement? One possible answer is that they do so because they think this will ease their preferred leader’s hand in putting their partisan vision into action, provided that the leader will continue winning elections. We study this phenomenon through a survey experiment in Turkey, by manipulating voters’ perceptions about the potential results of the first presidential election after a constitutional referendum of executive aggrandizement. We find that voters from both sides display what we call “elastic support” for executive aggrandizement; that is, they change previously revealed constitutional preferences in response to varying winning chances. This elasticity increases not only when citizens feel greater social distance to perceived political “others” (i.e., affective polarization) but also when voters are concerned about economic management in a potential post-incumbent era. Our findings contribute to the literature on how polarization and economic anxiety contribute to executive aggrandizement and democratic backsliding.

Suggested Citation

  • Şaşmaz, Aytuğ & Yagci, Alper H. & Ziblatt, Daniel, 2022. "How Voters Respond to Presidential Assaults on Checks and Balances: Evidence from a Survey Experiment in Turkey," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 55(11), pages 1947-1980.
    • Handle: RePEc:zbw:espost:300885
    DOI: 10.1177/00104140211066216
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/300885/1/Full-text-article-Ziblatt-How-voters.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/00104140211066216?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. S. Erdem Aytaç & Ali Çarkoğlu & Kerem Yıldırım, 2017. "Taking Sides: Determinants of Support for a Presidential System in Turkey," South European Society and Politics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 22(1), pages 1-20, January.
    2. Sergei Guriev & Daniel Treisman, 2019. "Informational Autocrats," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 33(4), pages 100-127, Fall.
    3. Philippe Aghion & Alberto Alesina & Francesco Trebbi, 2004. "Endogenous Political Institutions," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 119(2), pages 565-611.
    4. Daron Acemoglu & James A. Robinson & Ragnar Torvik, 2013. "Why Do Voters Dismantle Checks and Balances?," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 80(3), pages 845-875.
    5. Ragnar Torvik & Daron Acemoglu & James A. Robinson, 2013. "Why Do Voters Dismantle Checks and Balances? Extensions and Robustness," Working Paper Series 14013, Department of Economics, Norwegian University of Science and Technology.
    6. James A. Robinson & Ragnar Torvik, 2016. "Endogenous Presidentialism," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 14(4), pages 907-942.
    7. Yağcı, Alper H. & Oyvat, Cem, 2020. "Partisanship, media and the objective economy: Sources of individual-level economic assessments," Greenwich Papers in Political Economy 28306, University of Greenwich, Greenwich Political Economy Research Centre.
    8. Alvaro Forteza & Juan S. Pereyra, 2019. "When do Voters Weaken Checks and Balances to Facilitate Economic Reform?," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 86(344), pages 775-800, October.
    9. McKelvey, Richard D., 1976. "Intransitivities in multidimensional voting models and some implications for agenda control," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 12(3), pages 472-482, June.
    10. Graham, Matthew H. & Svolik, Milan W., 2020. "Democracy in America? Partisanship, Polarization, and the Robustness of Support for Democracy in the United States," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 114(2), pages 392-409, May.
    11. Weingast, Barry R., 1997. "The Political Foundations of Democracy and the Rule of the Law," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 91(2), pages 245-263, June.
    12. Daniel Treisman, 2011. "Presidential Popularity in a Hybrid Regime: Russia under Yeltsin and Putin," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 55(3), pages 590-609, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. María Clara Arroyo, 2018. "The Effect of Executive Constraints on Reform Implementation: An Empirical Analysis," Documentos de Trabajo (working papers) 0118, Department of Economics - dECON.
    2. Forteza, Alvaro & Mussio, Irene & Pereyra, Juan S., 2024. "Can political gridlock undermine checks and balances? A lab experiment," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 108(C).
    3. Hans Gersbach & Oriol Tejada & Julia Wagner, 2022. "Policy Reforms and the Amount of Checks & Balances," CER-ETH Economics working paper series 22/373, CER-ETH - Center of Economic Research (CER-ETH) at ETH Zurich.
    4. Karakas, Leyla D., 2017. "Institutional constraints and the inefficiency in public investments," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 152(C), pages 93-101.
    5. Karakas, Leyla D., 2016. "Political turnover and the accumulation of democratic capital," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 195-213.
    6. Adrian Nicholas Gachet, 2022. "Help Me Help You? Populism and Distributive Politics in Ecuador," Economics Discussion Paper Series 2205, Economics, The University of Manchester.
    7. Karthik Reddy & Moritz Schularick & Vasiliki Skreta, 2020. "Immunity," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 61(2), pages 531-564, May.
      • Karthik Reddy & Moritz Schularick & Vasiliki Skreta, 2012. "Immunity," Working Papers 12-17, New York University, Leonard N. Stern School of Business, Department of Economics.
      • Karthik Reddy & Moritz Schularick & Vasiliki Skreta, 2013. "Immunity," Working Papers 13-04, New York University, Leonard N. Stern School of Business, Department of Economics.
      • Karthik Reddy & Moritz Schularick & Vasiliki Skreta, 2013. "Immunity," CESifo Working Paper Series 4445, CESifo.
    8. Randall G. Holcombe, 2018. "Checks and Balances: Enforcing Constitutional Constraints," Economies, MDPI, vol. 6(4), pages 1-12, October.
    9. Hector Galindo‐Silva, 2020. "External threats, political turnover, and fiscal capacity," Economics and Politics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32(3), pages 430-462, November.
    10. Eicher, Theo S. & García-Peñalosa, Cecilia & Kuenzel, David J., 2018. "Constitutional rules as determinants of social infrastructure," Journal of Macroeconomics, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 182-209.
    11. Andrea Sáenz de Viteri Vázquez & Christian Bjørnskov, 2020. "Constitutional power concentration and corruption: evidence from Latin America and the Caribbean," Constitutional Political Economy, Springer, vol. 31(4), pages 509-536, December.
    12. Vlaicu, Razvan & Whalley, Alexander, 2016. "Hierarchical accountability in government," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 85-99.
    13. Jan Fałkowski & Katarzyna Metelska-Szaniawska, 2015. "Przyczyny ustanawiania i stabilność konstytucji państwa - perspektywa ekonomiczna," Gospodarka Narodowa. The Polish Journal of Economics, Warsaw School of Economics, issue 3, pages 79-105.
    14. Guizzo Altube, Matías & Scartascini, Carlos & Tommasi, Mariano, 2023. "The Political Economy of Redistribution and (in)Efficiency in Latin America and the Caribbean," IDB Publications (Working Papers) 13194, Inter-American Development Bank.
    15. Alvaro Forteza & Juan S. Pereyra, 2021. "Separation of powers with ideological parties," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 33(3), pages 333-382, July.
    16. Voigt, Stefan, 2011. "Empirical constitutional economics: Onward and upward?," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 80(2), pages 319-330.
    17. Dimitrios Xefteris, 2011. "The political economy of constitutional restraints," Constitutional Political Economy, Springer, vol. 22(3), pages 221-237, September.
    18. Michael Mitsopoulos & Theodore Pelagidis, 2017. "A model of constitutional design and corruption," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 44(1), pages 67-90, August.
    19. Martin Ardanaz & Carlos Scartascini, 2014. "The economic effects of constitutions: do budget institutions make forms of government more alike?," Constitutional Political Economy, Springer, vol. 25(3), pages 301-329, September.
    20. Alvaro Forteza & Irene Mussio & Juan Pereyra, 2019. "Does political gridlock undermine checks and balances? A Lab Experiment," Documentos de Trabajo (working papers) 0519, Department of Economics - dECON.

    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:zbw:espost:300885. 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/zbwkide.html .

    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.