Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- List of Tables
- List of Figures
- Contributors
- Acknowledgments
- INTRODUCTION
- PART I DESIGNING EXPERIMENTS
- PART II THE DEVELOPMENT OF EXPERIMENTS IN POLITICAL SCIENCE
- PART III DECISION MAKING
- PART IV VOTE CHOICE, CANDIDATE EVALUATIONS, AND TURNOUT
- 13 Candidate Impressions and Evaluations
- 14 Media and Politics
- 15 Candidate Advertisements
- 16 Voter Mobilization
- PART V INTERPERSONAL RELATIONS
- PART VI IDENTITY, ETHNICITY, AND POLITICS
- PART VII INSTITUTIONS AND BEHAVIOR
- PART VIII ELITE BARGAINING
- PART IX ADVANCED EXPERIMENTAL METHODS
- AFTERWORD
- Name Index
- Subject Index
- References
15 - Candidate Advertisements
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 05 June 2012
Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- List of Tables
- List of Figures
- Contributors
- Acknowledgments
- INTRODUCTION
- PART I DESIGNING EXPERIMENTS
- PART II THE DEVELOPMENT OF EXPERIMENTS IN POLITICAL SCIENCE
- PART III DECISION MAKING
- PART IV VOTE CHOICE, CANDIDATE EVALUATIONS, AND TURNOUT
- 13 Candidate Impressions and Evaluations
- 14 Media and Politics
- 15 Candidate Advertisements
- 16 Voter Mobilization
- PART V INTERPERSONAL RELATIONS
- PART VI IDENTITY, ETHNICITY, AND POLITICS
- PART VII INSTITUTIONS AND BEHAVIOR
- PART VIII ELITE BARGAINING
- PART IX ADVANCED EXPERIMENTAL METHODS
- AFTERWORD
- Name Index
- Subject Index
- References
Summary
Nowhere can democracy be better seen “in action” than during political campaigns. As Lau and Pomper (2002) argue, “Democracy is a dialogue between putative leaders and citizens. Campaigns provide the most obvious and the loudest forums for this dialogue. Candidates try to persuade voters to cast a ballot and to support their cause. Voters respond by coming to the polls and selecting their preferred candidates” (47). Candidates make their arguments in speeches at campaign rallies and on their Web sites, but those venues are primarily experienced by the most committed of partisans. It is only through their campaign advertisements that candidates have any chance of reaching uncommitted voters. And in times of even very approximate party balance, it is uncommitted voters who usually determine election outcomes. Hence, political ads are arguably the vehicle through which democracy operates.
Consider the choices facing a political candidate at the outset of a democratic election campaign. To simplify, let us assume a candidate's goal is to win the election, but he or she is facing one or more opponents who have the same goal and therefore want to defeat him or her. All candidates must decide what strategy to follow in order to maximize their chances of winning. But all candidates face resource limits that put very real constraints on what it is possible to do. Therein lies the rub. Candidates must decide how they can get the biggest bang for their buck.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Cambridge Handbook of Experimental Political Science , pp. 214 - 227Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2011
References
, and . 1995. Going Negative: How Attack Ads Shrink and Polarize the Electorate. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
, , and . 1999. “Replicating Experiments Using Aggregate and Survey Data: The Case of Negative Advertising and Turnout.” American Political Science Review 93: 902–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , , and . 1994. “Does Attack Advertising Demobilize the Electorate?” American Political Science Review 88: 829–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, and . 2007. “Channel Surfing: Does Choice Reduce Videomalaise?” Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association, Chicago.Google Scholar
. 1991. “Instrument and ‘Quasi-Instrumental’ Variables.” American Journal of Political Science 35: 777–800.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 2005. “Striking a Responsive Chord: How Political Ads Motivate and Persuade Voters by Appealing to Emotions.” American Journal of Political Science 49: 388–405.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, and . 2010. “Dynamic Public Opinion: Communication Effects over Time.” American Political Science Review 104: 663–680.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, and . 2004. “‘Targeted’ Advertising and Voter Turnout: An Experimental Study of the 2000 Presidential Election.” Journal of Politics 66: 69–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, and . 2009. “An Experimental Investigation of Advertising Persuasiveness: Is Impact in the Eye of the Beholder?” Working paper, Vanderbilt University.Google Scholar
, , , and . 2007. Campaign Advertising and American Democracy. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.Google Scholar
, , , and . 2007. “The Influence of Television and Radio Advertising on Candidate Evaluations: Results from a Large Scale Randomized Experiment.” Working paper, Yale University.Google Scholar
, and . 1997. “Impact of Negative Advertising on Evaluations of Political Candidates: The 1993 Canadian Federal Elections.” Basic and Applied Social Psychology 19: 205–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1959. “Reconciling Conflicting Results Derived from Experimental and Survey Studies of Attitude Change.” American Psychologist 14: 8–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1997. “Effects of the Television Spots on Images of Dole and Clinton.” American Behavioral Scientist 40: 1085–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , and . 2007. “Beyond the ‘Narrow Data Base’: Another Convenience Sample for Experimental Research.” Political Behavior 29: 415–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2003. “Communication and Politics in the Age of Information.” In Oxford Handbook of Political Psychology, eds. , , and . New York: Oxford University Press, 357–393.Google Scholar
, and . 2003. “Sex and the Grand Old Party: An Experimental Investigation of the Effect of Candidate Sex on Support for a Republican Candidate.” American Politics Research 31: 595–612.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 2009. “Who Votes? How and When Negative Campaigning Affects Voter Turnout.” Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association, Chicago.Google Scholar
, and . 2002. “Effectiveness of Negative Campaigning in U.S. Senate Elections, 1988–98.” American Journal of Political Science 46: 47–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, and . 2004. Negative Campaigning: An Analysis of U.S. Senate Elections. Lanham, MD: Rowman Littlefield.Google Scholar
, and . 2006. How Voters Decide: Information Processing in Election Campaigns. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , and . 2007. “The Effects of Negative Political Campaigns: A Meta-Analytic Reassessment.” Journal of Politics 69: 1176–209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , , and . 2005. “What Voters Want from Campaign Communication.” Political Communication 22: 337–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , and . 1995. “The Responsive Voter: Campaign Information and the Dynamics of Candidate Evaluation.” American Political Science Review 89: 309–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, and . 1998. “The Black-Sheep Effect: How Positive and Negative Advertisements Affect Voters' Perceptions of the Sponsor of the Advertisement.” Journal of Applied Social Psychology 28: 1903–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 2001. The Race Card: Campaign Strategy, Implicit Messages, and the Norm of Equality. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , and . 1989. “Candidate Traits and Voter Inferences: An Experimental Study.” Journal of Politics 51: 917–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, and . 1988. “Appeals and Strategies of Negative Political Advertising.” Journal of Broadcast and Electronic Media 32: 415–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, and . 1997. “Character Attacks and Their Effects on Perceptions of Male and Female Political Candidates.” Political Psychology 18: 93–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1986. “College Sophomores in the Laboratory: Influence of a Narrow Data Base on Social Psychology's View of Human Nature.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 51: 515–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2007. The Race to 270: The Electoral College and the Campaign Strategies of 2000 and 2004. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
- 8
- Cited by