FIND DATA: By Journal | Sites   ANALYZE DATA: Help with R | SPSS | Stata | Excel   WHAT'S NEW? US Politics | IR | Law & Courts🎵
   FIND DATA: By Journal | Sites   WHAT'S NEW? US Politics | IR | Law & Courts🎵
WHAT'S NEW? US Politics | IR | Law & Courts🎵
If this link is broken, please report as broken. You can also submit updates (will be reviewed).

Elites' Self-Explanations Fail When Others Hint at Hidden Motives

Elite ExplanationsAccountability LimitsSurvey ExperimentsCounter-ExplanationsPolitical BehaviorBJPS7 R files10 Stata files6 datasetsDataverse
Subfield banner image

Holding elected officials accountable is crucial, but their explanations often fall short. This article reveals a key limitation in the literature on elite explanation giving.

New Findings:

* We show that explanations from elites are ineffective against counter-explanations highlighting ulterior motives.︎

* Even low-credibility partisan sources can diminish the impact of these official accounts.︎

* These results suggest elected officials have less leeway in actions than previously thought.︎

Experimental Design:

* Our work employs three pre-registered survey experiments to demonstrate this finding.︎

The Puzzle:

This research underscores a tension: while elites offer explanations, citizens often suspect hidden agendas.︎

Article Card
Can Elites Escape Blame by Explaining Themselves? Suspicion and the Limits of Elite Explanations was authored by Joshua Robison. It was published by Cambridge in BJPS in 2022.
Find on Google Scholar
Find on JSTOR
Find on CUP
British Journal of Political Science
Edit article record marker