Conventional wisdom suggests large, persistent gaps between partisans’ stores of political knowledge, fanning concerns about democratic accountability. We reconsider the frequency and size of these “partisan knowledge gaps,” assembling a dataset of 162,083 responses to 187 items on 47 surveys. We find these gaps are smaller and less frequent than commonly understood; the average is a mere six and a half percentage points and gaps’ “signs” run counter to expectations roughly 30% of the time. Additionally, while most question features fail to predict gap size, we find that questions featuring vague response options allow individuals to interpret potential answers through their own biases, inflating gaps’ magnitudes. Our findings suggest that knowledge gaps — when they do exist — stem more from motivated responding than genuine differences in factual knowledge.
Article navigation
1 February 2023
Research Article|
February 01 2023
A Gap in Our Understanding? Reconsidering the Evidence for Partisan Knowledge Gaps Available to Purchase
Carolyn E. Roush;
Carolyn E. Roush
Florida State University
, USA
Search for other works by this author on:
Gaurav Sood
Gaurav Sood
Independent Researcher
, USA
Search for other works by this author on:
*
We are grateful to Doug Ahler, John Bullock, Hans Hassell, Don Green, Andy Guess, Matt Pietryka, and participants in the Democracy Fellows Seminar at the Ash Center for Democratic Governance and Innovation at the Harvard Kennedy School for their helpful comments and suggestions. A previous version of this paper was presented at the 2020 Annual Meeting of the Southern Political Science Association.
Online ISSN: 1554-0634
Print ISSN: 1554-0626
© 2023 C. E. Roush and G. Sood
2023
C. E. Roush and G. Sood
Licensed re-use rights only
Quarterly Journal of Political Science (2023) 18 (1): 131–151.
Citation
Roush CE, Sood G (2023), "A Gap in Our Understanding? Reconsidering the Evidence for Partisan Knowledge Gaps". Quarterly Journal of Political Science, Vol. 18 No. 1 pp. 131–151, doi: https://doi.org/10.1561/100.00020178
Download citation file:
Suggested Reading
Exploring female entrepreneurs’ marketing decisions with a heuristics and biases approach
Gender in Management: An International Journal (September,2019)
Do female and male entrepreneurs differ in their proneness to heuristics and biases?
Journal of Entrepreneurship in Emerging Economies (December,2019)
Heuristics and biases in human–algorithm interaction and hotel revenue management override decision-making
International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management (August,2024)
Advancing a theoretical framework for exploring heuristics and biases within HR decision-making contexts
Personnel Review (April,2024)
Related Chapters
The Role of Heuristics and Biases in Entrepreneurial Decision-making When Creativity is a Necessity
The Entrepreneurial Behaviour: Unveiling the cognitive and emotional aspect of entrepreneurship
Homo Politicus: Reflections on The Passions and the Interests
Research in the History of Economic Thought and Methodology
Towards a Reliable Origin-Destination Matrix from Massive Amounts of Smart Card and GPS Data: Application to Santiago
Transport Survey Methods: Best Practice for Decision Making
Recommended for you
These recommendations are informed by your reading behaviors and indicated interests.
