When prophecy bends: The preference–expectation link in U.S. presidential elections, 1952–1980.

Abstract

Using data from national surveys done prior to the past eight U.S. presidential elections by the Survey Research Center/Center for Political Studies of the University of Michigan, the relation between preference and expectation was analyzed. In each year, people tended to expect their preferred candidate to win by a ratio of about 4:1. This relationship was diminished, though it was still significant, in the years in which the outcome was relatively unambiguous. The relationship was strongest among people who were highly involved but poorly informed. Derivations from balance theory received considerable support. Analyses of two sets of panel data indicated that preferences are more stable than are expectations, and people are more likely to alter or bend their expectations to coincide with their preferences than vice versa. The discussion focused on the generality of the observed relationship, alternative explanations of the phenomenon, and the relation of the present study to the priority and dominance of affect and cognition.Previous research has dealt with social psychological consequences of a failure in prophecy (Festinger, Riecken, & Schachter, 1956;Hardyck & Braden, 1962). Our focus is on a prior step in the process, namely, the formation of a prophecy and how this prophecy is related to a person's preference. Relying on election survey data, we observe and examine the relationship between people's preferences

The Formation of Economic Perceptions in Post-Communist Countries of East Central Europe

“…However, the investigation of the role of knowledge in attenuating the effect of wishful thinking has yielded mixed results. Whereas Granberg and Brent (1983) found that in US presidential elections wishful thinking was strongest among poorly informed citizens, Babad (1995) was unable to support this finding in his study of the 1992 Israeli election.…”

“…In a series of experiments, social psychologists revealed that wishful thinking is widely present among sports fans and even sports bettors who ignore the odds of their favorite team to win (Babad 1987;Babad and Katz 1991). In electoral studies, the effect of wishful thinking has been explored in the U.S., Sweden, Israel and other democratic states (Granberg and Brent 1983;Babad et al 1992;Babad and Yacobos 1993;Babad 1995). All of the authors registered the operation of a wishful thinking mechanism among voters in predicting election outcomes.…”

Price dynamics in political prediction markets

“…First, these traders may take on substantial risk, since their portfolios will be heavily "tilted" toward one of the contracts. Second, partisan traders' inability to accommodate new information as rapidly as nonpartisan traders (49) results in their constant willingness to buy (or sell, depending on their bias) which prevents returns with larger magnitude from occurring. Interestingly, our findings for the 2000 Republican contract mirrors unexplained findings for the Indian stock market.…”

Improving Analysis: Dealing with Information Processing Errors

“…6 In addition to probability inaccuracies, humans are prone to selfconfirmation in cases where equivocal information exists or, in other words, "we perceive what we expect to perceive." 7 A wealth of research has demonstrated the human tendency to search out and attend only to evidence that confirms one's ideas, beliefs, or hypotheses. 8 The problem with the confirmatory tendency is that only information supportive of one's beliefs is attended to, even in the face of extremely disconfirming information.…”

“…This bias has been documented repeatedly, and may help account for the continued failure to use additional information. 7 This hindsight bias creates what personality psychologist H. J. Einhorn calls an "illusion of learning." 58 Given that humans as processors of information are quite fallible, what is to be done?…”