The Limits of Incumbent Blame Games in Times of Crisis: Experimental Evidence from Electoral Autocracy

Abstract This study investigates how blame-attributing crisis frames influence support for incumbents in an electoral authoritarian context, focusing on Türkiye. It asks how, to what extent, and under what conditions incumbents’ blame frames shape public attitudes toward the government. The study examines four crisis types (i.e., global warming , earthquake , economic collapse , and pandemic ) and compares the effects of religious , conspiratorial , and scientific framing across these contexts. Drawing on original data from seven pre-survey focus groups and a nationwide face-to-face survey experiment with 3,562 respondents, the findings indicate that the independent effects of blame frames are generally limited. However, the effectiveness of religion-based blame framing is highly context dependent. Compared with climate and economic crises, its estimated effects are more favorable in crises characterized by high uncertainty and relatively low perceived governmental responsibility, such as earthquake and pandemic. These findings suggest that the effectiveness of blame attribution is conditioned by the nature of the crisis itself. The study contributes to research on crisis framing, political accountability, and authoritarian durability.