Voters prefer whichever candidate represents the current policy status quo

Evidence

It is easy to see that problems 5 and 6 offer the same choice between Frank’s policy (42%, 15%) and Carl’s policy (23%, 22%). The problems differ only in the location of the status quo, which coincides with Frank’s policy in problem 5 and with Carl’s policy in problem 6. As implied by the notion of multiattribute loss aversion, the majority choice in both problems favored the status quo. The reluctance to trade is in this instance incompatible with standard utility theory, in which the preference between two policies should not depend on whether one or the other is designated as the status quo. — John T. Jost and Jim Sidanius, Political Psychology, 2449

Categorization

• XREF: Connects to status-quo bias and endowment effect literature (Thaler), and to framing effects in political science on incumbency advantage.
• SEED: Angle: how psychological status-quo bias, not candidate quality, may explain a measurable share of the incumbency advantage in elections — a testable political psychology claim.