Search

Abstract: Which parties use simple language in their campaign messages, and do simple campaign messages resonate with voters’ information about parties? This study introduces a novel link between the language applied during election campaigns and citizens’ ability to position parties in the ideological space. To this end, how complexity of campaign messages varies across parties as well as how it affects voters’ knowledge about party positions is investigated. Theoretically, it is suggested that populist parties are more likely to simplify their campaign messages to demarcate themselves from mainstream competitors. In turn, voters should perceive and process simpler campaign messages better and, therefore, have more knowledge about the position of parties that communicate simpler campaign messages. The article presents and validates a measure of complexity and uses it to assess the language of manifestos in Austria and Germany in the period 1945–2013. It shows that political parties, in general, use barely comprehensible language to communicate their policy positions. However, differences between parties exist and support is found for the conjecture about populist parties as they employ significantly less complex language in their manifestos. Second, evidence is found that individuals are better able to place parties in the ideological space if parties use less complex campaign messages. The findings lead to greater understanding of mass‐elite linkages during election campaigns and have important consequences for the future analysis of manifesto data. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper studies changes in voting preferences over election campaigns. Building on the literature on spatial models and valence issues, we study whether (1) ideological distance to political parties, (2) assessments of party competence to handle different policy issues, and (3) voter-updated candidate evaluations are factors that explain shifts in voter choices in the weeks preceding the election. To test our hypotheses, we use data from three survey panels conducted for the 2008, 2011 and 2015 Spanish general elections. Our findings show that valence factors are more influential than ideological indifference to account for campaign conversion. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

European Union (EU) referendums provide unique opportunities to study voters' attitudes toward a distant level of governance. Scholars have long tried to understand whether EU referendum results reflect domestic (dis-)satisfaction with the incumbent governments or actual attitudes toward the Union. Finding evidence supporting both domestic and European factors, the recent focus has thus turned to referendum campaigns. Recent studies emphasise the importance of the information provided to voters during these campaigns in order to analyse how domestic or European issues become salient in the minds of voters. These studies nonetheless overlook the asymmetrical political advantage in such campaigns. The broader literature on referendums and public opinion suggest that in a referendum, the 'No' side typically has the advantage since it can boost the public's fears by linking the proposal to unpopular issues. This article explores whether this dynamic applies to EU treaty ratification referendums. Does the anti-EU treaty campaign have more advantage than the pro-EU treaty campaign in these referendums? Campaign strategies in 11 EU treaty ratification referendums are analysed, providing a clear juxtaposition between pro-treaty ('Yes') and anti-treaty ('No') campaigns. Based on 140 interviews with campaigners in 11 referendums, a series of indicators on political setting and campaign characteristics, as well as an in-depth case study of the 2012 Irish Fiscal Compact referendum, it is found that the anti-treaty side indeed holds the advantage if it engages the debate. Nonetheless, the findings also show that this advantage is not unconditional. The underlying mechanism rests on the multidimensionality of the issue. The extent to which the referendum debate includes a large variety of 'No' campaign arguments correlates strongly with the campaigners' perceived advantage/disadvantage, and the referendum results. When the 'No' side's arguments are limited (either through a single-issue treaty or guarantees from the EU), this provides the 'Yes' side with a 'cleaner' agenda with which to work. Importantly, the detailed data demonstrate that the availability of arguments is important for the 'Yes' side as well. They tend to have the most advantage when they can tap into the economic costs of an anti-EU vote. This analysis has implications for other kinds of EU referendums such as Brexit, non-EU referendums such as independence referendums, and the future of European integration. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article puts the second-order theory for regional elections to the test. Not by analysing voting behaviour but with the use of campaign data. The assumption that regional campaigns are overshadowed by national issues was verified by analysing the campaign tweets of Flemish politicians who ran for the regional or national parliament in the simultaneous elections of 2014. No proof was found for a hierarchy of electoral levels but politicians clearly mix up both levels in their tweets when elections coincide. The extent to which candidates mix up governmental levels can be explained by the incumbency past of the candidates, their regionalist ideology, and the political experience of the candidates. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Anti-Islamic sentiments have become central to right-wing populist mobilization in Western societies, which often results in negative portrayals of Muslims in political campaigns. Although these portrayals may have detrimental effects on minority members' identity formation and attitudes toward majority members, little is known about their effects on members of the depicted group. A lab experiment with 145 young Muslims reveals that right-wing populist ad exposure increases perceived discrimination, which in turn decreases individuals' self-esteem and national identification, and encourages hostility toward majority members. Religious identification, in contrast, is not affected by ad exposure. Implications of these findings for intergroup relations and democratic processes are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article examines and critiques the logic and practices of branding that inform contemporary American political campaigns within the context of ethical surplus, sign value versus use value, emotion and reason, and the tension of authenticity and cynicism. The original research is based upon 38 one-on-one, in-depth interviews with political consultants, including media strategists, communication directors, and advertising producers who are involved in the encoding and cultural production of political discourse. The qualitative findings illuminate a professional ideology among these elite practitioners that obfuscates the pursuit of power by strategizing texts that involve emotional evocation rather than rational deliberation and embed candidates within signifiers of and proxies for authenticity. These efforts are intended to strike a disinterested, non-instrumental pose on behalf of the “branded candidates” they represent. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The minimal effect theory of campaign studies stipulates that intense political competition during campaigns assures and reinforces the initial party choice of the electorate. We find that this reinforcement is two-fold. During the campaign, the party preference of the voters’ in-group party increases while the party preference of the voters’ out-group parties decreases. Voters’ preference for their most preferred party (MPP) increases during the election campaign, while their preference for their least liked party decreases during the campaign (LPP). Across parties voters experience an increase in their preference for their most preferred party and a decrease for their least liked party as the campaign progresses. These trends show that the political campaign polarizes the electorate by increasing the affective distance between in-group party and out-group party preferences, thereby resulting in stronger political polarization after the campaign than before the campaign. The data utilized in this study is a large six-wave panel-study of Danish voters’ party preferences during the Danish parliamentary election of 2011. Thus, the analysis provides evidence of the minimal effect theory and of political polarization within a multi-party context. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses the concept of hybrid media campaigning in relation to the authors' claim about how 2016 U.S. presidential candidate Donald Trump utilized mass media coverage to secure the American Republican Party's nomination. Political communication in America is addressed, along with populist politicians, celebrity culture, and Trump's blend of politics and entertainment. Publicity and Trump's use of social media platforms such as Twitter during his campaign are assessed.

The rise of sound-bite news is one of the most widely bemoaned findings in political communication research. Yet, the detrimental effects of this trend have been more assumed than demonstrated. This study examines one consequence of sound-bite journalism: the creation of incomplete argument, in which speakers presenting their political position in the news do not also justify it. Drawing on data about television news in Germany, Russia, and the United States, it shows that shrinking sound bites consistently reduce the probability of opinion justification across widely differing national contexts. Sound-bite journalism emerges as harmful to television news' ability to produce public justification. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Public discourse in India's northeastern state Meghalaya is dominated by issues of tribal identity and the threat of being overwhelmed by outsiders. In the context of national elections, local campaigners have to respond to and navigate between the different requirements of national and regional politics. Election campaigns, understood as a negotiation process during which campaigners act as brokers, provide insights into the narratives and characteristics of politics in Meghalaya. Manifestos, leaflets and large-scale events communicate a statement about organisational strength and a candidate's popularity, and subsequently about the capacity to ultimately deliver to the voter. Aesthetics used during campaigning such as music and clothing styles carry messages about the awareness and closeness of the campaigner to the imagination and needs of the local population. Although the entrance of social media into election campaigning is about to change elections and the role of campaigners in Meghalaya, local campaigners will remain important due to their ability to navigate between different levels of politics and to resolve contradictory campaign messages by drawing on different semiotic registers of campaigning. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Critical theorists in the mid-twentieth century argued that behavioral social science by its nature conceptualizes knowledge as the power to predict and control. As such, rather than serving as a source of enlightenment or emancipation, social science risked functioning as a tool for dominating and manipulating the public. The power of this criticism, however, was undermined by the behavioral revolution’s initial failure to produce theories that offered much prognostic power. Recent methodological and technological developments in the social sciences have begun to generate an impressive ability to predict human behavior, especially when combined with new innovations in marketing and computer science. Disturbingly, political campaigns and interest groups, especially in the US, appropriate this new knowledge to try to alter the beliefs and behaviors of voters. This development bodes ill for US democracy and other liberal democracies where the use of these techniques is likely to increase. It turns citizens into objects of manipulation and undermines the public sphere by thwarting public deliberation, aggravating political polarization, and facilitating the spread of misinformation. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

People generally have imperfect introspective access to the mechanisms underlying their political beliefs, yet can confidently communicate the reasoning that goes into their decision making process. An innate desire for certainty and security in ones beliefs may play an important and somewhat automatic role in motivating the maintenance or rejection of partisan support. The aim of the current study was to clarify the role of the DLPFC in the alteration of political beliefs. Recent neuroimaging studies have focused on the association between the DLPFC (a region involved in the regulation of cognitive conflict and error feedback processing) and reduced affiliation with opposing political candidates. As such, this study used a method of non-invasive brain simulation (tRNS) to enhance activity of the bilateral DLPFC during the incorporation of political campaign information. These findings indicate a crucial role for this region in political belief formation. However, enhanced activation of DLPFC does not necessarily result in the specific rejection of political beliefs. In contrast to the hypothesis the results appear to indicate a significant increase in conservative values regardless of participant's initial political orientation and the political campaign advertisement they were exposed to. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Campaigns invoke identity appeals to specific groups of voters, including women. To understand whether these campaign appeals matter in affecting voters’ choices, we must better understand how women respond to these appeals, the causal mechanism driving responses, and whether male and female candidates can use these ads with equal effectiveness. Using a nationally representative sample of American voters and an experimental design, we test an identity-based appeal aimed at women. We find that, although candidates of either gender can use these ads to affect women’s votes, only female candidates are able to prime female voters’ gender identity. The use of these appeals by male candidates persuades female voters of their positive traits. Male voters are generally unaffected by the appeals. Given the integration of women and men in the general population, our results demonstrate the utility of targeted appeals in encouraging support from a specific group and avoiding backlash from others. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Studies have shown that market orientation influences content. However, scant research examines how news organizations with different market orientations covered the same story. This study utilizes textual analysis and long-form interviews to compare coverage of the 2013 St. Louis mayoral race. The study compares the strongly market oriented St. Louis Post-Dispatch and the weakly market oriented St. Louis Beacon. Findings showed major differences in content, especially concerning how the two covered race, periphery candidates and the presentation of campaign issues. These results are interpreted through the lens of gatekeeping theory. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Some contemporary politicians try to mobilize racial attitudes by conveying implicit racial messages against their opponents—messages in which the racial reference is subtle but recognizable and which attack the opponent for alleged misdeeds. Although targeted politicians have tried a number of different strategies to respond to implicit racial appeals, little is known about the effectiveness of these strategies. Using two survey experiments, we answer the following question: Does calling the appeal “racial” work? That is, does it neutralize the negative effects on the attacked candidate? We find mixed evidence that it does. However, offering a credible justification for the attacked behavior works more consistently. We also test whether effects vary by candidate race. The results suggest that Black candidates’ rhetorical strategies are more constrained than identical White candidates’, but that White Americans are more open to credible arguments and justifications than the previous literature implies. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

This paper extends the small existing theoretical literature on negative campaigning, building on work by Harrington and Hess (Games Econ Behav 17:209-229, ). While their analysis explores the determinants of negative campaign spending using a classic spatial voting model, this paper relies instead on a probabilistic voting model, extending the use of this popular model to a new setting. The main lesson of the analysis is that negative campaign spending is higher for the relatively more-centrist candidate. The more-extreme candidate in the electoral contest devotes, by contrast, comparatively more of her funds to positive campaign spending. This result, which at first appears unrelated to the main findings of Harrington and Hess (Games Econ Behav 17:209-229, ) and Chakrabarti (Scottish J Polit Econ 54:136-149, ), actually can be viewed as aligning with their conclusions, although the underlying mechanics are very different. The paper also offers an empirical test of this prediction. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

How do homo- and bisexual people explain the launch of a homophobia campaign that violates their basic human rights? Which narratives do they use to adjust to the hostile environment? On the basis of 77 in-depth problem-centered interviews with LGBT in Russia we explore the explanations they use to talk about their experience of a homophobia campaign. Respondents demonstrate their awareness of the political reasoning behind the campaign and explain it as a tool for electoral mobilization, the repression of pro-Western oriented opposition and as a part of biopolitical technologies adopted by the government to increase its control over people's bodies and minds. Contrary to intuitive expectations, this political awareness does not protect the informants from self-blame, social escapism and moral suffering. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

As a key element of their strategy, recent Presidential campaigns have recruited thousands of workers to engage in direct voter contact. We conceive of this strategy as a principal-agent problem. Workers engaged in direct contact are intermediaries between candidates and voters, but they may be ill-suited to convey messages to general-election audiences. By analyzing a survey of workers fielded in partnership with the 2012 Obama campaign, we show that in the context of the campaign widely considered most adept at direct contact, individuals who were interacting with swing voters on the campaign’s behalf were demographically unrepresentative, ideologically extreme, cared about atypical issues, and misunderstood the voters’ priorities. We find little evidence that the campaign was able to use strategies of agent control to mitigate its principal-agent problem. We question whether individuals typically willing to be volunteer surrogates are productive agents for a strategic campaign. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

At the outset of the 2012 presidential race, Republican candidate Mitt Romney touted his private sector leadership of the private equity firm Bain Capital. As this election unfolded, Romney's Bain Capital story became less of a narrative he could run on and more of a narrative he had to run from. Why did this Bain Capital story, a story about someone's success in the free marketplace in a society that seemingly values such success, become so troubling for the Romney campaign? This question constitutes the centerpiece of the present essay. In addressing this question, we argue that the Bain Capital narrative's role in the 2012 presidential race divulges a great deal about the fundamental nature of economic discourse in American democracy. Specifically, we contend that the economic narratives circulating in American democracy actually construct a tale of two economies--a tangible economy and a speculative economy. Unfortunately for Romney, his Bain Capital narrative situated him on the wrong side of this economic divide. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We explore the effects of competitive and cooperative motivations on contributions in a field experiment. A total of 10,000 potential political donors received solicitations referencing past contribution behavior of members of the competing party (competition treatment), the same party (cooperative treatment), or no past contribution information (control). We first theoretically analyze the effect of these treatments on the contribution behavior of agents with different social preferences in a modified intergroup public good (IPG) game. Then, we report the empirical results: Contribution rates in the competitive, cooperative, and control treatments were 1.45%, 1.08%, and 0.78%, respectively. With the exception of one large contribution, the distribution of contributions in the competitive treatment first order stochastically dominates that of the cooperative treatment. Qualitatively, it appears that the cooperative treatment induced more contributions around the common monetary reference point, while the competitive treatment led to more contributions at twice this amount. These results suggest that eliciting competitive rather than cooperative motivations can lead to higher contributions in IPG settings. ( JEL D72, H41, C93) [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

An introduction is presented, in which editor discusses the theme of the issue on the 2016 U.S. presidential campaign for Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump to create trust among voters.

Abstract: This article argues that evidence, even when used politically, contributes to high‐quality democratic discourse. Research results on the use of evidence in referendum campaigns in Switzerland show that (1) evidence fosters discourse quality and shifts the focus away from politics to policy; (2) evaluations and basic research contribute positively to discourse, but not opinion surveys and statistics; (3) the participation of experts and administrative practitioners in discourse is crucial to make evidence available to the public; and (4) evidence is always used as a part of a narrative and can alter the constructed images used in a story. In conclusion, the implications for practitioners are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]