Abstract. The COVID-19 pandemic brought about some extraordinary shifts in citizens’ preferences about intergovernmental responsibilities in several federal states and has therefore provided an especially interesting context to contribute to the ongoing debate about the scope, direction, and determinants of attitudinal change in citizens’ preferences in situations of protracted crisis. Although there is evidence of the role of partisanship and some other factors during normal times, the importance that partisanship may have with respect to other factors in accounting for changes in citizens’ preferences during these crises still needs to be established. Does partisanship account for attitudinal changes during a crisis, or do citizens have other predispositions, such as individual core beliefs about federalism, perceptions of government performance, or trust in government, which could account for the scope and direction of these changes? The article relies on an original national survey of 7,175 respondents collected during the transition from the first to the second wave of the pandemic in Spain and examines the shift in citizens’ preferences in three policy domains: healthcare, nursing homes, lockdown declaration and management. It finds that partisanship and attribution of responsibility are relevant to explaining shifts in preferences for intergovernmental responsibilities, whereas, contrary to expectations, individual beliefs about autonomism are not significant. The authors’ findings contribute to the broader literature on the configuration of public preferences for multilevel governments and to understanding blame management and accountability during crisis situations in federal democracies.