Partisan bias, attribute substitution, and the benefits of an indirect format for eliciting forecasts and judgments of trend

Abstract

A majority of Americans reported the economy to be worsening when objective indicators showed it to be recovering. We show that this is symptomatic of attribute substitution—people answer a taxing question as though asked a related easy-to-answer question. An implication of attribute substitution is that forecasts will vary across a direct format, which asks whether the economy will be better in 12 months, versus an indirect format, which asks respondents to rate both current conditions and the conditions they expect for 12 months’ time. We compare these formats in three studies and over 2,000 respondents. Relative to the direct format, the indirect format delivers trends that show greater consensus across Republicans and Democrats; are less equivocal about the course of the US economy; and are more realistic about the magnitude of change in opinion poll data.