Share This Article:

RETRACTED: The Timing of Presidential Scandals: The Dynamics of Economics, the Media and a Divided Government

Abstract Full-Text HTML Download Download as PDF (Size:435KB) PP. 98-105
DOI: 10.4236/ojps.2013.33014    2,300 Downloads   5,152 Views   Citations


Short Retraction Notice

The substantial portions of the text came from Dr. Thomas Sowers and Dr. James Nelson research, “The Economic Impact of Presidential Scandals” presented at the Southern Political Science Association’s Annual Meeting in 2004.

This article has been retracted to straighten the academic record. In making this decision the Editorial Board follows COPE's Retraction Guidelines. Aim is to promote the circulation of scientific research by offering an ideal research publication platform with due consideration of internationally accepted standards on publication ethics. The Editorial Board would like to extend its sincere apologies for any inconvenience this retraction may have caused.

The full retraction notice in PDF is preceding the original paper, which is marked "RETRACTED".

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Cite this paper

Raizada, H. (2013) RETRACTED: The Timing of Presidential Scandals: The Dynamics of Economics, the Media and a Divided Government. Open Journal of Political Science, 3, 98-105. doi: 10.4236/ojps.2013.33014.


[1] Abramowitz, A. I. (1985). Economic conditions, presidential popularity, and voting behavior in midterm congressional elections. The Journal of Politics, 47, 31-43. doi:10.2307/2131064
[2] Beck, N. (1991). Comparing dynamic specifications: The case of presidential approval. In J. A. Stimson (Ed.), Political analysis, Vol. 3 (pp. 51-57). Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
[3] Brace, P., & Hinckley, B. (1991). The structure of presidential approval: Constraints within and across presidencies. The Journal of Politics, 53, 993-1017. doi:10.2307/2131864
[4] Conley, R. S. (2003). The presidency, congress, and divided government: A postwar assessment. College Station, TX: Texas A&M University Press.
[5] Fackler, T., & Lin, T.-M. (1995). Political corruption and presidential election, 1929-1992. Journal of Politics, 57, 971-993. doi:10.2307/2960398
[6] Gerhardt, M. J. (2000). The impeachment and acquittal of president William Jefferson Clinton. In M. J. Rozell, & C. Wilcox (Eds.), The Clinton Scandal and the future of American Government (p. 173). Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
[7] Greene, S. (2001). The role of character assessments in presidential approval. American Politics Research, 29, 196-210. doi:10.1177/1532673X01029002004
[8] Kagay, M. R. (1999). Presidential address: Public opinion and polling during presidential scandal and impeachment. Public Opinion Quarterly, 63, 449-463. doi:10.1086/297734
[9] Lanoue, D. J. (1994). Prospective and retrospective voting in presidential-year elections. Political Research Quarterly, 47, 193-205.
[10] Lockerbie, B. (1992). Prospective voting in presidential elections: 1956-1988. American Politics Quarterly, 20, 308-325. doi:10.1177/1532673X9202000303
[11] Maurer, P. J. (1999). Media feeding frenzies: Press behavior during two Clinton scandals. Presidential Studies Quarterly, 29, 65-79. doi:10.1111/1741-5705.00019
[12] Mayhew, D. R. (1991). Divided we govern: Party control, lawmaking, and investigations, 1946-1990. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
[13] Nadeau, R., Niemi, R. G., Fan, D. P., & Amato, T. (1999). Elite economic forecasts, economic news, mass economic judgements, and presidential approval. Journal of Politics, 61, 109-135. doi:10.2307/2647777
[14] Norpoth, H. (1996). Presidents and the prospective voter. The Journal of Politics, 58, 776-792. doi:10.2307/2960444
[15] Olson, K. W. (2003). Watergate: The presidential scandal that shook America. Lawrence, KS: University Press of Kansas.
[16] Parker, S. L. (1995). Toward an understanding of “Rally” effects: Public opinion in the Persian Gulf War. Public Opinion Quarterly, 59, 526-546. doi:10.1086/269492
[17] Pfiffner, J. P. (1994). The modern presidency. New York: St. Martin’s Press.
[18] Quirk, P. J. (2000). Scandal time: The Clinton impeachment and the distraction of American politics. In M. J. Rozell, & C. Wilcox (Eds.) The Clinton Scandal and the future of American Government (pp. 760-762). Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
[19] Renshon, S. A. (2002a). The polls: The public’s response to the Clinton scandals, Part 1: Inconsistent theories, contradictory evidence. Presidential Studies Quarterly, 32, 169-184.
[20] Renshon, S. A. (2002b). The polls: The public’s response to the Clinton scandals, Part 2: Diverse explanations, clearer consequences. Presidential Studies Quarterly, 32, 412-427. doi:10.1111/j.0360-4918.2002.00228.x
[21] Sabato, L. J. (1991). Feeding frenzy: How attack journalism has transformed American politics. New York: Free Press.
[22] Schultz, J. D. (2000). Presidential scandals. Washington, DC: CQ Press.
[23] Sinclair, B. (2000). Hostile partners: The president, congress, and lawmaking in the partisan 1990s. In J. R. Bond, & R. Fleisher (Eds.), Polarized politics. Washington, DC: CQ Press.
[24] Williams, R. (2000). Political scandals in the USA. Chicago, IL: Fitzroy Dearborn Publishers.

comments powered by Disqus

Copyright © 2020 by authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc.

Creative Commons License

This work and the related PDF file are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.