@article{ healy_substituting_2014-1,
  title = {Substituting the {End} for the {Whole}: {Why} {Voters} {Respond} {Primarily} to the {Election}-{Year} {Economy}},
  volume = {58},
  copyright = {©2013, Midwest Political Science Association},
  issn = {1540-5907},
  shorttitle = {Substituting the {End} for the {Whole}},
  url = {http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ajps.12053/abstract},
  doi = {10.1111/ajps.12053},
  abstract = {According to numerous studies, the election-year economy influences presidential election results far more than cumulative growth throughout the term. Here we describe a series of surveys and experiments that point to an intriguing explanation for this pattern that runs contrary to standard political science explanations, but one that accords with a large psychological literature. Voters, we find, actually intend to judge presidents on cumulative growth. However, since that characteristic is not readily available to them, voters inadvertently substitute election-year performance because it is more easily accessible. This “end-heuristic” explanation for voters’ election-year emphasis reflects a general tendency for people to simplify retrospective assessments by substituting conditions at the end for the whole. The end-heuristic explanation also suggests a remedy, a way to align voters’ actions with their intentions. Providing people with the attribute they are seeking—cumulative growth—eliminates the election-year emphasis.},
  language = {en},
  number = {1},
  urldate = {2014-01-06TZ},
  journal = {American Journal of Political Science},
  author = {Healy, Andrew and Lenz, Gabriel S.},
  year = {2014},
  pages = {31--47}
}

{"_id":"mYCFvnbPjhDAaFMcY","authorIDs":[],"author_short":["Healy, A.","Lenz, G.<nbsp>S."],"bibbaseid":"healy-lenz-substitutingtheendforthewholewhyvotersrespondprimarilytotheelectionyeareconomy-2014","bibdata":{"abstract":"According to numerous studies, the election-year economy influences presidential election results far more than cumulative growth throughout the term. Here we describe a series of surveys and experiments that point to an intriguing explanation for this pattern that runs contrary to standard political science explanations, but one that accords with a large psychological literature. Voters, we find, actually intend to judge presidents on cumulative growth. However, since that characteristic is not readily available to them, voters inadvertently substitute election-year performance because it is more easily accessible. This “end-heuristic” explanation for voters’ election-year emphasis reflects a general tendency for people to simplify retrospective assessments by substituting conditions at the end for the whole. The end-heuristic explanation also suggests a remedy, a way to align voters’ actions with their intentions. Providing people with the attribute they are seeking—cumulative growth—eliminates the election-year emphasis.","author":["Healy, Andrew","Lenz, Gabriel S."],"author_short":["Healy, A.","Lenz, G.<nbsp>S."],"bibtex":"@article{ healy_substituting_2014-1,\n title = {Substituting the {End} for the {Whole}: {Why} {Voters} {Respond} {Primarily} to the {Election}-{Year} {Economy}},\n volume = {58},\n copyright = {©2013, Midwest Political Science Association},\n issn = {1540-5907},\n shorttitle = {Substituting the {End} for the {Whole}},\n url = {http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ajps.12053/abstract},\n doi = {10.1111/ajps.12053},\n abstract = {According to numerous studies, the election-year economy influences presidential election results far more than cumulative growth throughout the term. Here we describe a series of surveys and experiments that point to an intriguing explanation for this pattern that runs contrary to standard political science explanations, but one that accords with a large psychological literature. Voters, we find, actually intend to judge presidents on cumulative growth. However, since that characteristic is not readily available to them, voters inadvertently substitute election-year performance because it is more easily accessible. This “end-heuristic” explanation for voters’ election-year emphasis reflects a general tendency for people to simplify retrospective assessments by substituting conditions at the end for the whole. The end-heuristic explanation also suggests a remedy, a way to align voters’ actions with their intentions. Providing people with the attribute they are seeking—cumulative growth—eliminates the election-year emphasis.},\n language = {en},\n number = {1},\n urldate = {2014-01-06TZ},\n journal = {American Journal of Political Science},\n author = {Healy, Andrew and Lenz, Gabriel S.},\n year = {2014},\n pages = {31--47}\n}","bibtype":"article","copyright":"©2013, Midwest Political Science Association","doi":"10.1111/ajps.12053","id":"healy_substituting_2014-1","issn":"1540-5907","journal":"American Journal of Political Science","key":"healy_substituting_2014-1","language":"en","number":"1","pages":"31--47","shorttitle":"Substituting the End for the Whole","title":"Substituting the End for the Whole: Why Voters Respond Primarily to the Election-Year Economy","type":"article","url":"http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ajps.12053/abstract","urldate":"2014-01-06TZ","volume":"58","year":"2014","bibbaseid":"healy-lenz-substitutingtheendforthewholewhyvotersrespondprimarilytotheelectionyeareconomy-2014","role":"author","urls":{"Paper":"http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ajps.12053/abstract"},"downloads":0},"bibtype":"article","biburl":"http://bibbase.org/zotero/nicmer","creationDate":"2015-04-01T06:12:30.637Z","downloads":0,"keywords":[],"search_terms":["substituting","end","whole","voters","respond","primarily","election","year","economy","healy","lenz"],"title":"Substituting the End for the Whole: Why Voters Respond Primarily to the Election-Year Economy","year":2014,"dataSources":["P7bHLEfmPfwtQBBTM"]}