What moves (spending) mood? The nature and origins of parallel public preferences

Abstract While research shows that public preferences across policy domains tend to move in parallel, the mechanisms behind this dynamic remain unclear. We examine four explanations: (1) alignment in preferred policy levels; (2) parallel policy movement combined with domain-specific thermostatic feedback; (3) feedback to global policy across domains; and (4) responsiveness to presidential partisanship. These mechanisms matter for how we interpret public opinion change and policy responsiveness. We develop and test a theoretical model using data on four social spending domains in the USA. Our findings suggest that spending mood reflects both parallelism in preferred policy levels and responsiveness to overall social spending and presidential party affiliation.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Political Science Research and Methods
Published
2025-08-15
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1017/psrm.2025.10024
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Electoral Systems and Political Participation
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
8.52

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

What moves (spending) mood? The nature and origins of parallel public preferences

Ryan E. Carlin, Steven M. Van Hauwaert, Christopher Wlezien
1 citations
Political Science Research and Methods
Electoral Systems and Political Participation
8.52
article

What moves (spending) mood? The nature and origins of parallel public preferences

Ryan E. Carlin, Steven M. Van Hauwaert, Christopher Wlezien
article en
1 citations

Abstract

Abstract While research shows that public preferences across policy domains tend to move in parallel, the mechanisms behind this dynamic remain unclear. We examine four explanations: (1) alignment in preferred policy levels; (2) parallel policy movement combined with domain-specific thermostatic feedback; (3) feedback to global policy across domains; and (4) responsiveness to presidential partisanship. These mechanisms matter for how we interpret public opinion change and policy responsiveness. We develop and test a theoretical model using data on four social spending domains in the USA. Our findings suggest that spending mood reflects both parallelism in preferred policy levels and responsiveness to overall social spending and presidential party affiliation.

Political Science Research and Methods
Radboud University Nijmegen (NL), Georgia State University (US), Université Catholique de Lille (FR), The University of Texas at Austin (US)
University of Cambridge
Openalex Percentile: Top 3%
Electoral Systems and Political Participation
8.52
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.