10.7910/DVN/KH9N7WAdams, JamesJamesAdamsUniversity of California, DavisWeschle, SimonSimonWeschleSyracuse UniversityWlezien, ChristopherChristopherWlezienUniversity of Texas at AustinHarvard Dataverse2020Social SciencesElite interactionsPolicy perceptionsAdams, JamesJamesAdamsUniversity of California, DavisWeschle, SimonSimonWeschleSyracuse UniversityWlezien, ChristopherChristopherWlezienUniversity of Texas at AustinWeschle, SimonSimonWeschleSyracuse University2019-10-142021-10-2010.1111/ajps.125102851212249531772344107005527234111373432722731173864210758388386443198774008601209694967625961318528355914204428725973049825840835831833833type/x-r-syntaxtype/x-r-syntaxtype/x-r-syntaxapplication/pdfapplication/gzipapplication/pdfapplication/gzipapplication/pdfapplication/gzipapplication/pdfapplication/gzipapplication/pdfapplication/gzipapplication/pdfapplication/gzipapplication/pdfapplication/pdfapplication/pdfapplication/octet-streamtext/plainapplication/x-texapplication/x-texapplication/x-texapplication/x-texapplication/x-texapplication/x-texapplication/x-texapplication/x-texapplication/x-texapplication/x-texapplication/x-texapplication/x-tex1.2Recent research documents that voters infer that governing coalition partners share similar ideologies, independently of these parties’ actual policy statements. We argue that citizens estimate party positions from more general forms of inter-party cooperation and conflict, particularly near the times of national elections. We analyze tens of thousands of media reports on elite interactions from 13 Western democracies between 2001 and 2014, and show that – controlling for coalition arrangements and for the policy tones of parties’ election manifestos – voters infer greater left-right agreement between pairs of parties that have more cooperative public relationships, but that this “cooperation effect” is only evident near the times of national elections. Our findings have implications for parties’ policy images and for mass-elite linkages.This dataset underwent an independent verification process that replicated the tables and figures in the primary article. For the supplementary materials, verification was performed solely for the successful execution of code. The verification process was carried out by the Odum Institute for Research in Social Science at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. <br></br> The associated article has been awarded Open Materials and Open Data Badges. Learn more about the Open Practice Badges from the <a href="https://osf.io/tvyxz/wiki/home/" target="_blank">Center for Open Science</a>.<br></br> <img src="https://odum.unc.edu/files/2019/09/OpenData_PR.png" alt="Open Data Badge" height="77" width="80"> <img src="https://odum.unc.edu/files/2019/09/OpenMaterials_PR.png" alt="Open Materials Badge" height="77" width="80">