Existing economic voting theory is insufficient as a model of both individual-level voting behavior and aggregate-level electoral outcomes, so this chapter proposes a more persuasive account by drawing on cognitive-psychological theories of decision-making. In particular, I build on priming theory (e.g. Iyengar & Kinder 1987) to formulate a new psychology of economic voting that highlights the power of economic campaign messages to condition the strength of the economic vote. Unlike the ideal-typical assumptions that motivate the conventional economic voting model and the clarity of responsibility thesis, this psychological argument is built inductively on well-documented patterns of human behavior. Rather than assert that citizens are instrumentally rational actors who intend to behave as economic voters, priming theory provides a strong microfoundational basis for understanding why and to what extent voters turn to their economic opinions when casting a ballot. By reevaluating the psychology of economic voting in light of extensive research on priming, I also provide a systematic account of the influence of campaign strategy on individual-level political behavior, which extant theory treats only in an ad hoc fashion. As a result, a campaign-centered theory rooted in the priming approach provides robust theoretical grounds for understanding the interactions between economic performance, political campaigns, and electoral outcomes.

Psychological theories of decision-making necessarily elevate the power of individual action over structural and institutional factors. Despite this methodological individualism, the argument I develop in this chapter is not that economic structure has no influence on electoral outcomes.