This document summarizes a workshop presentation on attributions of responsibility for economic situations during the 2005 German election. It discusses how people attribute responsibility, the determinants of those attributions like political sophistication and media usage, and presents data on changing levels of attributed responsibility over time and the effects of various factors. Logistic regression results show the impacts of individual economic situations, interest, partisanship, and an interaction between media usage and contextualization on attributions of responsibility.

1. Attributions of Responsibility
Dynamics and Determinants: The Case of
the 2005 German Election
Lisbon, April 17, 2009
Thorsten Faas
University of Mannheim
ECPR Joint Sessions, Workshop 16 “Political information, public
knowledge and perceptions of reality”

2. Attributions of Responsibility
1
• Workshop “Political Information, public knowledge and perceptions of
reality”: How do people see (and explain) reality? What is the role of
the informational environment?
• Attributions of responsibility as a crucial element
• Important …
– … from an individual’s point of view
– … but also from the point of view of the political system as a
whole: what is government / politics responsible for?
• Studying such attributions – their determinants, but also their effects
– as an important task for political science
• Here with respect to economic situations: Who is responsible for the
state of the economy (and how can we explain that)?

3. Determinants of Attributions of Responsibility
2
• ÊDefensive attributions“
• ÊMorselizing“ / “politically relevant variance”
• Political sophistication
• ÊContextualization“ (real-world cues, front-page news)
Information environment
• Campaigns
• Partisan rationalizations and cultural predispositions

4. Data
3
• Rolling Cross-Section Survey covering the final 41 days of
the 2005 German Federal Election campaign (n=3,583)
• Items:
– “What do you think, to what extent is the ruling
government responsible for the development of this
economic situation: to a large extent, to some extent or
not at all?”
– Êthis economic situation“ refers to
• Individual’s own economic situation
• Situation of the national economy
– dichotomized

5. Data
4
• ÊDefensive attributions“ Perceived state of own and
national economic situation
• ÊMorselizing“ / “politically relevant variance”
• Political sophistication Interest in Politics
• ÊContextualization“ (real-world cues, front-page news)
Interaction term Media usage
(total vs. by source)
• Campaigns
Distance to Election Day
• Partisan rationalizations and cultural predispositions
Party Identification,
Left-Right-Placement

6. Development of Level of Attributed Responsibility
5
1
Mean Level of Attribution
.5
0
13.8. 20.8. 27.8. 3.9. 10.9. 17.9.
date
Individual's economic situation Nation's economic situation

7. Determinants: National Economic Situation
6
Media use: total Media use: by source
Ind. Econ. Ind. Econ.
Nat. Econ. Nat. Econ.
Interest Interest
Left-Right Left-Right
PI: SPD PI: SPD
PI: Union PI: Union
PI: other PI: other
day day
Media use: total Media use: total
Media use: priv. TV Media use: priv. TV
Media use: Public TV Media use: Public TV
Media use: Tabloid Media use: Tabloid
Media use: Quality Media use: Quality
interaction interaction
-4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4
logit coefficients logit coefficients

8. Determinants: Individual Economic Situation
7
Media use: total Media use: by source
Ind. Econ.
Ind. Econ.
Nat. Econ.
Nat. Econ.
Interest
Interest
Left-Right
Left-Right
PI: SPD
PI: SPD
PI: Union
PI: Union
PI: other
PI: other
day
day
Media use: total
Media use: total
Media use: priv. TV
Media use: priv. TV
Media use: Public TV
Media use: Public TV
Media use: Tabloid
Media use: Tabloid
Media use: Quality
Media use: Quality
interaction
interaction
-4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4
-4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4
logit coefficients
logit coefficients

9. Determinants: Individual Economic Situation
8
+ Interaction Term
Ind. Econ.
Nat. Econ.
Interest
Left-Right
PI: SPD
PI: Union
PI: other
day
Media use: total
Media use: priv. TV
Media use: Public TV
Media use: Tabloid
Media use: Quality
interaction
-4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4
logit coefficients

10. Predicted Probabilities
9
1
.8
probability
.6
.4 .2
0
0 .2 .4 .6 .8 1
Individual economic situation
National economic situation ...
... very poor ... good
... poor ... very good
... average

11. Conclusions
10
• Information environment affects how people make sense of the world
• Information can have different sources
• However, media effects hard to understand without content analysis
• Contact:
Thorsten Faas
University of Mannheim
A5, 6
68131 Mannheim
Germany
Thorsten.Faas@uni-mannheim.de
www.thorsten-faas.de