This study aims to examine the variation in individuals’ approval of their national leaders during national crises. Previous studies indicate that international crises tend to increase citizens’ approval of governments and political incumbents. Such a sudden spike in public approval during times of crisis reflects the “rally-round-the-flag” effect. However, since the global outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic in early 2020, existing research on the rally effect has shown mixed results. While most studies have focused on singlecountry surveys, few utilize cross-national survey data. To fill the gap in the literature, this study uses cross-national panel survey data and adopts multilevel models to test hypotheses about rally effects in the COVID-19 crisis. The findings of this study are threefold. Firstly, individuals with a heightened fear of the pandemic were more likely to support their national leaders. Secondly, in countries with higher COVID-19 death tolls, citizens tended to exhibit greater support for their national leaders. Thirdly, in countries with more stringent policies to cope with the pandemic, citizens demonstrated higher levels of support for their national leaders. Overall, this study facilitates a better understanding of the rally-round-the-flag effect, and it also provides important policy implications for political behavior in times of crisis.

Issue position is undoubtedly an important factor in accounting for individuals’ political attitudes and behaviors from the approach of rational choice. But the possibility that the perception of issue salience plays a moderating variable has been neglected in the literature. It is hypothesized in this study that people are more likely to be aware of their and the parties’ positions on a particular issue when they consider the issue important. Meanwhile, people tend to exaggerate the distance between major parties’ positions on such an issue. People’s perception of issue salience, therefore, shapes their political attitudes.

Survey data are used in this study to analyze people’s perception of salience regarding “unification-independent “and “nuclear power” in order to examine their hypothesized role of moderating variables shaping people’s evaluation of government performance. It is found that the results of data analysis support the above hypotheses. However, such results depend on the nature of the issues. If people hold rigid attitudes toward an issue over the long term, its moderating effects on shaping people’s political attitudes are reduced.