“An Inherited Money Dude from Queens County”: How Unseen Candidate Characteristics Affect Voter Perceptions
We examine the effect of biographical knowledge on voters’ assessments of leaders. Prior research has shown that voters infer traits from candidate characteristics such as race, gender and incumbency, which are visible to even poorly-informed voters. Given voters’ limited knowledge, we argue that less-visible attributes may be easily misperceived, possibly affecting overall assessments of candidates. Focusing on President Trump, we find via a national survey that many Americans are unaware that he was born into great wealth. This misperception increases support for Trump, mediated through beliefs that he is both empathetic and good at business. We supplement our observational analysis with an experiment treating respondents with information regarding the role Trump’s father played in his career. This information leads respondents to rate the president more negatively on both empathy and business ability. These findings suggest that correcting information about candidate characteristics can change the minds of even loyal partisans.
KeywordsPolitical knowledge Character traits Presidential approval Experiments
Special thanks to Shibley Telhami and Stella Rouse, the Directors of the University of Maryland Critical Issues Poll, for providing the survey resources necessary to execute this research. We would also like to extend thanks to Frances Lee for providing helpful feedback on previous versions of this article, as well as Michael Hanmer and Zachary Scott for their guidance.
Compliance with Ethical Standards
All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.
It was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
- Anson, I. G. (2018). Partisanship, political knowledge, and the dunning‐kruger effect. Political Psychology Online First.Google Scholar
- Barrett, W. (2016). Trump: The greatest show on earth. The deals, the downfall, the reinvention. New York: Simon and Schuster.Google Scholar
- Blair, G. (2000). The trumps: Three generations that built an empire. New York: Simon and Schuster.Google Scholar
- Campbell, A., Converse, P. E., Miller, W. E., & Stokes, D. E. (1960). The American voter. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
- Cook, T. E. (1998). Governing with the news: The news media as a political institution. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
- Delli Carpini, M. X., & Keeter, S. (1996). What Americans know about politics and why it matters. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
- Dolan, K. (2004). Voting for women: How the public evaluates women candidates. Boulder: Westview Press.Google Scholar
- Gans, H. (1979). Deciding what’s news: A study of CBS evening news, NBC nightly news, newsweek and time. New York: Vintage.Google Scholar
- Graber, D. (1988). Processing in the news: How people tame the information tide. New York: Addison-Wesley Longman.Google Scholar
- Green, D. P., Palmquist, B., & Schickler, E. (2002). Partisan hearts and minds: Political parties and the social identities of voters. New Haven, CT: Yale UP.Google Scholar
- Guess, A. & Coppock, A. (2018). Does counter-attitudinal information cause backlash? Results from three large survey experiments. British Journal of Political Science, in print online.Google Scholar
- Holian, D. B., & Prysby, C. L. (2015). Candidate character traits in presidential elections. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
- Kendall, K. E. (2000). Communication in the Presidential primaries: Candidates and the media, 1912–2000. Santa Barbara: Praeger Publishing.Google Scholar
- Kinder, D. R. (1986). Presidential character revisited. In R. R. Lau & D. O. Sears (Eds.), Political cognition (pp. 233–255). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
- Kinder, D. R., & Kalmoe, N. P. (2017). Neither liberal nor conservative: Ideological innocence in the American public. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
- Miller, W. E., & Shanks, J. M. (1996). The new American voter. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
- Nyhan, B., Porter, E., Reifler, J., & Wood, T. (2017). Taking corrections literally but not seriously? The effects of information on factual beliefs and candidate favorability. Unpublished manuscript.Google Scholar
- Popkin, S. L. (1994). The reasoning voter: Communication and Persuasion in presidential campaigns. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
- Putnam, R. D., & Campbell, D. E. (2010). American grace: How religion divides and unites US. New York: Simon and Schuester.Google Scholar