Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jkksz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-24T18:44:56.389Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Issues, Candidate Image, and Priming: The Use of Private Polls in Kennedy's 1960 Presidential Campaign

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2013

Lawrence R. Jacobs  and
Robert Y. Shapiro
Lawrence R. Jacobs
Affiliation:
University of Minnesota
Robert Y. Shapiro
Affiliation:
Columbia University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Interpretations of electoral campaigns have pointed to two mutually exclusive strategies: candidates are expected to focus either on policy issues or on personal image. We argue, however, that social psychologists' notion of priming offers an empirically grounded and theoretically plausible campaign strategy for treating image and issues as interconnected strategic concerns. Based on both quantitative and historical analysis of John F. Kennedy's 1960 presidential campaign, we find that the candidate's policy positions were related to results from his private public opinion polls. Archival and interview evidence suggests that Kennedy deliberately used these popular issues to shape the electorate's standards for evaluating his personal attributes (rather than to win over utility-maximizing voters). We conclude that the study of priming offers one important approach to reintegrating research on candidate strategy and voter behavior.

Type
Articles
Information
American Political Science Review , Volume 88 , Issue 3 , September 1994 , pp. 527 - 540
Copyright
Copyright © American Political Science Association 1994

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Abramson, Paul, Aldrich, John, and Rohde, David. 1991. Change and Continuity in the 1980 Elections. Rev. ed. Washington: Congressional Quarterly.Google Scholar
Aldrich, John H., and Michael Alvarez, R.. 1992. “Issues and the Presidential Primary Voter.” Presented at the annual meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association, Chicago.Google Scholar
Aldrich, John H., Sullivan, John, and Borgida, Eugene. 1989. “Foreign Affairs and Issue Voting: Do Presidential Candidates Waltz before a Blind Audience?” American Political Science Association 83:123–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Banks, Jeffrey. 1991. Signalling Games in Political Science. New York: Harwood Academic.Google Scholar
Berelson, Bernard, Lazarsfeld, Paul, and Mc, WilliamPhee. 1954. Voting: A Study of Opinion Formation in a Presidential Campaign. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Cameron, Charles, and Enelow, James. 1992. “Asymmetric Policy Effects: Campaign Contributions and the Spatial Theory of Elections.” Mathematical and Computer Modelling 16:117–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campbell, Angus, Converse, Philip, Miller, Warren, and Stokes, Donald. 1960. The American Voter. New York: John Wiley.Google Scholar
David, Sheri. 1985. With Dignity: The Search for Medicare and Medicata. Westport, CT: Greenwood.Google Scholar
Davis, Otto, Hinich, Melvin J., and Ordeshook, Peter C.. 1970. “An Expository Development of a Mathematical Model of the Electoral Process.” American Political Science Review 64:426–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Downs, Anthony. 1957. An Economic Theory of Democracy. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
Erikson, Robert, and Romero, David. “Candidate Equilibrium and the Behavioral Model of the Vote.” American Political Science Review 84:1103–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Finkel, Steven. 1993. “Reexamining the ‘Minimal Effects’ Model in Recent Presidential Campaigns.” Journal of Politics 55:1–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fiorina, Morris P. 1981. Retrospective Voting in American National Elections. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Geer, John G. 1991. “Critical Realignments and the Public Opinion Poll.” Journal of Politics 53:434–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Geer, John G. 1992. “Party Competition and the Campaign: The Search for Differences.” Presented at the annual meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association, Chicago.Google Scholar
Ginsberg, Benjamin. 1972. “Critical Elections and the Substance of Party Conflict: 1844 to 1968.” Midwest Journal of Political Science 16:603–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ginsberg, Benjamin. 1976. “Elections and Public Policy.” American Political Science Review. 70:41–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Iyengar, Shanto. 1990. “Shortcuts to Political Knowledge: The Role of Selective Attention and Accessibility.” In Information and Democratic Processes, ed. Ferejohn, John A. and Kuklinski, James H.. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
Iyenger, Shanto, and Kinder, Donald. 1987. News That Matters. Chicago: Chicago University Press.Google Scholar
Jackson, Donald W., and Riddlesperger, James W. Jr., 1991. “John F. Kennedy and the Politics of Civil Rights.” Presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Washington.Google Scholar
Jacobs, Lawrence R. 1992a. “Institutions and Culture: Health Policy and Public Opinion in the U.S. and Britain.” World Politics 44:179–209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jacobs, Lawrence R. 1992b. “The Recoil Effect: Public Opinion and Policy Making in the U.S. and Britain.” Comparative Politics 24:199–217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jacobs, Lawrence R. 1993. The Health of Nations: Public Opinion in the Making of American and British Health Policy. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jacobs, Lawrence R., and Shapiro, Robert Y.. 1992. “Leadership and Responsiveness: Some New Evidence on the Johnson Presidency.” Presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Chicago.Google Scholar
Keith, Bruce E., Magleby, David B., Nelson, Candice J., Orr, Elizabeth, Westlye, Mark C., and Wolfinger, Raymond E.. 1992. The Myth of the Independent Voter. Berkeley: University of California Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kelley, Stanley. 1983. Interpreting Elections. Princeton: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kessel, John. 1992. Presidential Campaign Politics. 4th ed.Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.Google Scholar
Key, V. O. 1961. Public Opinion and American Democracy. New York: Knopf.Google Scholar
Krosnick, Jon, and Kinder, Donald. 1990. “Altering the Foundations of Support for the President Through Priming.” American Political Science Review 84:497–512.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lavine, Harold, Sullivan, John, Borgida, Eugene, and Thomsen, Cynthia. 1992. “The Relationship of National and Personal Issue Salience to Attitude Accessibility on Foreign and Domestic Policy Issues.” University of Minnesota. Manuscript.Google Scholar
Lowi, Theodore J. 1967. “Party, Policy, and Constitution in America.” In The American Party Systems, ed. Chambers, William N. and Burnham, Walter D.. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Lowi, Theodore J. 1985. The Personal President: Power Invested, Promise Unfulfilled. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Moore, David. 1992. The Superpollsters: How They Measure and Manipulate Public Opinion in America. New York: Four Walls Eight Windows.Google Scholar
Nie, Norman, Verba, Sidney, and Petrocik, John. 1979. The Changing American Voterent. ed. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Page, Benjamin I. 1978. Choices and Echoes in Presidential Elections. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Page, Benjamin I., and Shapiro, Robert Y.. 1992. The Rational Public. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Petrocik, John R. 1991. “Divided Government: Is It All in the Campaigns?” In The Politics of Divided Government, ed. Cox, Gary W. and Kernell, Samuel. Boulder: Westview.Google Scholar
Pool, Ithiel de Sola, Abelson, Robert P., and Popkin, Samuel L.. 1964. Candidates, Issues, and Strategies: A Computer Simulation of the 1960 Presidential Election. Cambridge: Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press.Google Scholar
Popkin, Samuel L. 1991. The Reasoning Voter. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rahn, Wendy M., Aldrich, John H., Borgida, Eugene, and Sullivan, John L.. 1990. “A Social–Cognitive Model of Candidate Appraisal.” In Information and Democratic Processes, ed. Ferejohn, John A. and Kuklinski, James H.. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
Schattschneider, E. E. 1948. The Struggle for Party Government. College Park, MD: Program in American Civilization.Google Scholar
Smith, Eric R. A. N. 1989. The Unchanging American Voter. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Sniderman, Paul M., Glaser, James M., and Griffin, Robert. 1990. “Information and Electoral Choice.” In Information and Democratic Processes, ed. Ferejohn, John A. and Kuklinski, James H.. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
United States Congress. Senate. 1961. Freedom of Communications: Final Report of the Committee on Commerce. 87th Cong., 1st sess., S. Doc. 994, parts 1 and 3.Google Scholar
West, Darrell M. 1991. “Ads and Priming in Election Campaigns.” Presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Washington.Google Scholar
Young, John T. 1991. “Presidential Candidates and Public Opinion: Leadership or Followership in 1988.” Presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Washington.Google Scholar
Submit a response

Comments

No Comments have been published for this article.