Explaining Congressional Approval

Dürr, Robert; Gilmour, John B.; Wolbrecht, Christina

doi:10.2307/2111713

Cited by 174 publications

(187 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

178

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A second explanation is that the public disapproves of ineffective governance. For example, public approval of Congress tends to drop when Republicans and Democrats are polarized against one another and when Congress conflicts with the President (4,5). We test a third explanation that has less to do with action and more to do with talk (6).…”

mentioning

confidence: 96%

A decline in prosocial language helps explain public disapproval of the US Congress

Frimer

Gebauer

Zhu

et al. 2015

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Talking about helping others makes a person seem warm and leads to social approval. This work examines the real world consequences of this basic, social-cognitive phenomenon by examining whether record-low levels of public approval of the US Congress may, in part, be a product of declining use of prosocial language during Congressional debates. A text analysis of all 124 million words spoken in the House of Representatives between 1996 and 2014 found that declining levels of prosocial language strongly predicted public disapproval of Congress 6 mo later. Warm, prosocial language still predicted public approval when removing the effects of societal and global factors (e.g., the September 11 attacks) and Congressional efficacy (e.g., passing bills), suggesting that prosocial language has an independent, direct effect on social approval.US Congress | language | impression formation | public approval | LIWC A s recently as 2002, public approval of Congress was reliably over 50% and as high as 84%. In late 2013, though, public approval reached an all-time low, with less than 10% of Americans expressing support (1). What caused this dramatic decline in public approval in just over a decade? One explanation is that the public held Congress responsible for societal and global problems (e.g., a weak economy) (2, 3). A second explanation is that the public disapproves of ineffective governance. For example, public approval of Congress tends to drop when Republicans and Democrats are polarized against one another and when Congress conflicts with the President (4, 5). We test a third explanation that has less to do with action and more to do with talk (6). We suggest that recent public disapproval partly resulted from the disappearance of warm, prosocial language in Congressional discourse.Previous experimental research has shown that presenting a warm and prosocial demeanor increases social approval (7). People reveal a wealth of information about their feelings and intentions through verbal communication (8-10). The speaker's underlying motives notwithstanding, talking about helping others makes positive impressions upon an audience (11). We investigated whether this well-documented finding can explain public perceptions of Congress. Specifically, we asked whether the recent rise of public disapproval of Congress is predicted by declining prosocial language of elected representatives.To measure prosocial language, we computer analyzed all 123,927,807 words spoken in session of the US House of Representatives between 1996 and 2014. Our approach was to look for linguistic markers of prosocial language; we used content analysis software (12) to calculate the proportion of words in the target text that matched entries in a validated dictionary of prosocial words (13). We then compared levels of prosocial language within each month of Congress with their approval ratings by the American public (14) and found a striking match. Fig. 1 shows that levels of prosocial language and the public's approval followed the same trajectory ...

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 96%

A decline in prosocial language helps explain public disapproval of the US Congress

Frimer

Gebauer

Zhu

et al. 2015

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Scholars have demonstrated that the American electorate evaluates the president (MacKuen, Erikson, and Stimson 1992) and Congress (Durr, Gilmour, and Wolbrecht 1997) on the basis of prospective economic assessments of the national economy. Erikson, MacKuen, and Stimson (2002) show that aggregate appraisals of the macro-economy drive US presidential election outcomes.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The Usefulness of Consumer Sentiment: Assessing Construct and Measurement

Kellstedt

Linn

Hannah

2015

Public Opinion Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Approval ratings of Congress as an institution frequently drop below 40 percent, and at times have dropped below 20 percent (Durr, Gilmour, and Wolbrecht 1997;Anderson and Newmark 2002). Among the factors that influence congressional approval are scandals, which may paint the legislative branch as corrupt, or at least self-serving.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Burning the Midnight Oil: Clandestine Behavior, Hard Work, or Strategic Rush in Congressional Voting?

Ardoin¹

2009

ARP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

While the vast of majority voting in Congress occurs during regular working hours, two percent of the recorded votes and eleven percent of Key Votes each session over the last 15 years have occurred late into the evening. The purpose of this research is to examine this unique set of votes that members of Congress cast while burning the midnight oil. Although these late night votes represent only a small percentage of roll-call votes, they are clearly important to members of Congress, or at least their leaders, who are extremely busy. Roll-call votes scheduled late in the evening undoubtedly interfere with members’ regular schedules, and no member wants to spend their night on the hill after a long day of Washington work. The results of our analyses indicate the majority of late night voting can be explained by the strategic rush hypothesis which suggests members burn the midnight oil prior to long recesses and also later in the week in order to return to their constituents. We also find late night voting may be the result of an over burdened legislature. Finally, our results confirm the growing power of Congressional leaders, particularly in the House, to utilize and even abuse the legislative schedule to meet their policy and reelection goals.

show abstract

Explaining Congressional Approval

Cited by 174 publications

References 17 publications

A decline in prosocial language helps explain public disapproval of the US Congress

A decline in prosocial language helps explain public disapproval of the US Congress

The Usefulness of Consumer Sentiment: Assessing Construct and Measurement

Burning the Midnight Oil: Clandestine Behavior, Hard Work, or Strategic Rush in Congressional Voting?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About