Political Behavior

, Volume 31, Issue 3, pp 429–454 | Cite as

Elements of Negativity: Volume and Proportion in Exposure to Negative Advertising

Original Paper

Abstract

Recent studies contend that negative advertising benefits voters. However, these studies only measure the volume of negativity in campaigns, often relying on survey data on voter behavior coupled with estimates of negative ad exposure. Theories of information processing indicate that the proportion of negativity may yield influences spanning a range of judgments related to candidate construction and voting behavior, yielding effects that are different from the influence of sheer volume. Thus, I argue that the proportion of negativity also has an influence, and that it is likely more often to be detrimental. I examine this claim using survey data and conclude that prevailing accounts of the effects of negative advertising campaigns are underspecified and, as a result, potentially overly optimistic.

Keywords

Negative advertising Information processing Political judgments Turnout 

Supplementary material

11109_2008_9082_MOESM1_ESM.doc (240 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOC 240 kb)
11109_2008_9082_MOESM2_ESM.doc (35 kb)
Supplementary material 2 (DOC 35 kb)

References

  1. Allen, B., Stevens, D., Marfleet, G., Sullivan, J., & Alger, D. (2007). Local news and perceptions of the rhetoric of political advertising. American Politics Research, 35, 506–540. doi:10.1177/1532673X06298717.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Alvarez, R. Michael. (1998). Information and elections (2nd ed.). Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
  3. Ansolabehere, S., & Iyengar, S. (1995). Going negative: How political advertisements shrink and polarize the electorate. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
  4. Ansolabehere, S., Iyengar, S., & Simon, A. (1999). Replicating experiments using aggregate and survey data: The case of negative advertising and turnout. The American Political Science Review, 93, 901–910. doi:10.2307/2586120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Arceneaux, K., & Nickerson, G. (2005). Two field experiments testing negative campaign tactics. Presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Washington, D.C. Accessed 20 April, 2008.Google Scholar
  6. Ashworth, S., & Clinton, J. (2007). Does advertising exposure affect turnout? Quarterly Journal of Political Science, 2, 27–41. doi:10.1561/100.00005051.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Brader, T. (2005). Striking a responsive chord: How political ads motivate and persuade voters by appealing to voters. American Journal of Political Science, 49, 388–405. doi:10.1111/j.0092-5853.2005.00130.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Brader, T., & Corrigan, B. (2006). How the emotional tenor of ad campaigns affects political participation. Presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Philadelphia. Accessed 24 April, 2008.Google Scholar
  9. Brooks, D. (2006). The resilient voter: Moving toward closure in the debate over negative campaigning and turnout. The Journal of Politics, 68, 684–696.Google Scholar
  10. Brooks, D., & Geer, J. (2007). Beyond negativity: The effects of incivility on the electorate. American Journal of Political Science, 51, 1–16. doi:10.1111/j.1540-5907.2007.00233.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Clinton, J., & Lapinski, J. (2004). ‘Targeted’ advertising and voter turnout: An experimental study of the 2000 presidential election. The Journal of Politics, 66, 69–96. doi:10.1046/j.1468-2508.2004.00142.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Crigler, A., Just, M., & Belt, T. (2002). The three faces of negative campaigning: The democratic implications of attack ads, cynical news, and fear arousing messages. Presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Boston.Google Scholar
  13. Djupe, P., & Peterson, D. (2002). The timing and impact of negative campaigning: Evidence from the 1998 senatorial primaries. Political Research Quarterly, 55, 845–860.Google Scholar
  14. Finkel, S., & Geer, J. (1998). A spot check: Casting doubt on the demobilizing effect of attack advertising. American Journal of Political Science, 42, 573–595. doi:10.2307/2991771.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Freedman, P., Franz, M., & Goldstein, K. (2004). Campaign advertising and democratic citizenship. American Journal of Political Science, 48, 723–741. doi:10.1111/j.0092-5853.2004.00098.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Freedman, P., & Goldstein, K. (1999). Measuring media exposure and the effects of negative ads. American Journal of Political Science, 43, 1189–1208. doi:10.2307/2991823.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Freedman, P., Wood, W., & Lawton, D. (1999). Do’s and don’ts of negative ads: What voters say. Campaigns & Elections, 20, 20–36.Google Scholar
  18. Garramone, G., Atkin, C., Pinkleton, B., & Cole, R. (1990). Effects of negative political advertising on the political process. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 34, 299–311.Google Scholar
  19. Geer, J. (2006). In defense of negativity: Attack ads in presidential campaigns. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  20. Geer, J., & Lau, R. (2006). A new approach for studying campaign effects. British Journal of Political Science, 35, 269–290. doi:10.1017/S0007123406000159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Gilens, M., Vavreck, L., & Cohen, M. (2007). The mass media and the public’s assessments of presidential candidates, 1952–2000. The Journal of Politics, 69, 1160–1175. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2508.2007.00615.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Goldstein, K. (1997). Political advertising and political persuasion in the 1996 presidential campaign. Presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
  23. Goldstein, K., & Freedman, P. (2002). Campaign advertising and voter turnout: New evidence for a stimulation effect. The Journal of Politics, 64, 721–740. doi:10.1111/0022-3816.00143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Houston, D., & Doan, K. (1999). Can you back that up? Media Psychology, 1, 191–206. doi:10.1207/s1532785xmep0103_1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Houston, D., Doan, K., & Roskos-Ewoldsen, D. (1999). Negative political advertising and choice conflict. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 5, 3–16. doi:10.1037/1076-898X.5.1.3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Huber, G., & Arceneaux, K. (2007). Identifying the persuasive effects of presidential advertising. American Journal of Political Science, 51, 957–977. doi:10.1111/j.1540-5907.2007.00291.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Huddy, L., Feldman, S., & Cassesse, E. (2007). On the distinct effects of anxiety and anger. In W. Russell Neuman, G. Marcus, A. Crigler, & M. MacKuen (Eds.), The affect effect: Dynamics of emotion in political thinking and behavior (pp. 202–230). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  28. Jackson, R., & Carsey, T. (2007). U.S Senate campaigns, negative advertising, and voter mobilization in the 1998 midterm election. Electoral Studies, 26, 180–195. doi:10.1016/j.electstud.2006.06.010.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Jackson, R., & Sides, J. (2006). Revisiting the influence of campaign tone in Senate elections. Political Analysis, 14, 206–218. doi:10.1093/pan/mpj003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Kahn, K. F., & Kenney, P. (2004). No holds barred: Negativity in U.S. Senate campaigns. Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  31. Kaid, L. L., Chanslor, M., & Hovind, M. (1992). The influence of program and commercial type on political advertising effectiveness. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 36, 303–320.Google Scholar
  32. Krasno, J., & Green, D. (2008). Do televised presidential ads increase voter turnout? Evidence from a natural experiment. The Journal of Politics, 70, 245–261.Google Scholar
  33. Lau, R. (1982). Negativity in political perception. Political Behavior, 4, 353–378. doi:10.1007/BF00986969.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Lau, R. (1985). Two explanations for negativity effects in political behavior. American Journal of Political Science, 29, 119–138. doi:10.2307/2111215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Lau, R., & Pomper, G. (2004). Negative campaigning: An analysis of U.S. Senate elections. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.Google Scholar
  36. Lau, R., Sigelman, L., Heldman, C., & Babbitt, P. (1999). The effects of negative political advertisements: A meta-analytic assessment. The American Political Science Review, 93, 851–875. doi:10.2307/2586117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Lau, R., Sigelman, L., & Rovner, I. B. (2007). The effects of negative political campaigns: A meta-analytic reassessment. The Journal of Politics, 69, 1176–1209. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2508.2007.00618.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Lavine, H. (2002). On-line versus memory-based process models of political evaluation. In Kristen Renwick Monroe (Ed.), Political psychology (pp. 225–248). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  39. Lawton, D., & Freedman, P. (2001). Beyond negativity: advertising effects in the 2000 Virginia Senate race. Presented at the annual meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association.Google Scholar
  40. Lemert, J., Wanta, W., & Lee, T.-T. (1999). Party identification and negative advertising in a U.S. Senate election. The Journal of Communication, 49, 123–136. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.1999.tb02797.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Leshner, G., & Thorson, E. (2000). Overreporting voting: Campaign media public mood and the vote. Political Communication, 17, 263–278. doi:10.1080/105846000414278.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. MacKuen, M., Marcus, G., Russell Neuman, W., & L. Keele, (2007). The third way: The theory of affective intelligence and American democracy. In W. Russell Neuman, G. Marcus, A. Crigler, & M. MacKuen (Eds.), The affect effect: Dynamics of emotion in political thinking and behavior (pp. 124–151). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  43. Marcus, G., & MacKuen, M. (1993). Anxiety, enthusiasm, and the vote: The emotional underpinnings of learning and involvement during presidential campaigns. The American Political Science Review, 87, 672–685. doi:10.2307/2938743.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Martin, P. (2004). Inside the black box of negative campaign effects: Three reasons why negative campaigns mobilize. Political Psychology, 25, 545–562. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9221.2004.00386.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. McBride, A., Toburen, R., & Thomas, D. (1993). Does negative campaign advertising depress voter turnout? Evidence from two election campaigns. Unpublished manuscript. Grambling State University.Google Scholar
  46. Miller, W., & Merrill Shanks, J. (1996). The new American voter. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  47. Min, Y. (2004). News coverage of negative political campaigns: An experiment of negative campaign effects on turnout and candidate preference. The Harvard International Journal of Press/Politics, 9, 95–111. doi:10.1177/1081180X04271861.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Mutz, D., & Reeves, B. (2005). The new videomalaise: Effects of televised incivility on political trust. The American Political Science Review, 99, 1–16. doi:10.1017/S0003055405051452.Google Scholar
  49. Niven, D. (2006). A field experiment on the effects of negative campaign mail on voter turnout in a municipal election. Political Research Quarterly, 59, 203–210. doi:10.1177/106591290605900203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Peterson, D. (2004). Certainty of accessibility: Attitude strength in candidate evaluations. American Journal of Political Science, 48, 513–520. doi:10.1111/j.0092-5853.2004.00084.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Pinkleton, B., & Garramone, G. (1992). A survey of responses to negative political advertising: Voter cognition, affect and behavior. In L. N. Reid (Ed.), Proceedings of the 1992 Conference of the American Academy of Advertising (pp. 127–133). San Antonio, Texas: American Academy of Advertising.Google Scholar
  52. Rahn, W., & Hirshorn, R. (1999). Political advertising and public mood: A study of children’s political orientations. Political Communication, 16, 387–407. doi:10.1080/105846099198550.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Redlawsk, D. (2002). Hot cognition or cool consideration? Testing the effects of motivated reasoning on political decision making. The Journal of Politics, 64, 1021–1044. doi:10.1111/1468-2508.00161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Rosenstone, S., & Hansen, J. M. (1993). Mobilization, participation, and democracy in America. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  55. Schultz, C., & Mark Pancer, S. (1997). Character attacks and their effects on perceptions of male and female political candidates. Political Psychology, 18, 93–102. doi:10.1111/0162-895X.00046.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Stevens, D. (2002). Explaining heterogeneity in the effects of negative advertising. Presented at the annual meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association. Accessed 24 April, 2008.Google Scholar
  57. Stevens, D. (2008). Measuring exposure to political advertising in surveys. Political Behavior, 30, 47–72. doi:10.1007/s11109-007-9035-8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Taber, C. (2003). Information processing and public opinion. In D. Sears, L. Huddy, & R. Jervis (Eds.), Oxford handbook of political psychology (pp. 433–476). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  59. Thorson, E., Ognianova, E., Coyle, J., & Denton, F. (2000). Negative political ads and negative citizen orientations toward politics. Journal of Current Issues & Research in Advertising, 22, 13–41.Google Scholar
  60. Verba, S., Schlozman, K. L., & Brady, H. (1995). Voice and equality: Civic voluntarism in American politics. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  61. Wattenberg, M., & Brians, C. (1999). Negative campaign advertising: Demobilizer or mobilizer? The American Political Science Review, 93, 891–899. doi:10.2307/2586119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Witte, K. (1998). Fear as motivator, fear as inhibitor: Using the extended parallel process model to explain fear successes and failures. In P. Anderson & L. Guerrero (Eds.), Handbook of communication and emotion (pp. 423–450). San Diego: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  63. Zaller, J. (1992). The nature and origins of mass opinion. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of ExeterPenrynUK

Personalised recommendations