Attitudes on the Size of Unemployment Benefits: Ideology and Numbers

Abstract

The divide separating the political left from right is often expressed in specific numbers. The proper size of unemployment benefits is a key example of such a disagreement, with the left generally favoring higher levels of benefits than the right. However, little is currently known about how voters make up their mind on such policy relevant numbers. Using two survey experiments, this article shows that while Danish voters’ attitudes on unemployment benefits are correlated with their ideological position, they may also be strongly affected by the ways in which politically relevant numbers are presented and elicited. Specifically, when making up their minds on such numbers, voters are highly susceptible to anchoring effects and a unit effect. Furthermore, voters are affected more by precise numbers than by round numbers. Together, these results suggest that political actors may in some cases move public opinion closer to specific policy positions simply by presenting the relevant numbers in certain ways.

$100 a Month or $1,200 a Year? Regulatory Focus and the Evaluation of Temporally Framed Attributes

“…More recent research found that the temporal framing effect weakens for consumers who are less affectively involved in a purchase decision (Atlas & Bartels, 2018). In a political setting, Pedersen (2019) found that people on right (vs. left) of the political spectrum in the Netherlands perceived the size of unemployment benefits to be larger when it was framed in aggregate (vs. periodic) terms. Building on this stream of research, we aim to show that consumers’ regulatory goals—a factor central to a wide range of consumer decisions (Higgins et al, 2020)—may also exert a consequential impact on whether they would be susceptible to the temporal framing effect.…”