How Moral Motives Link Party Stereotypes

Abstract

Citizens hold robust stereotypes about the parties and their leaders, including the issues they are most competent at handling and the character traits they exemplify. Yet, we know less about whether and how party stereotypes are linked in the minds of voters. I argue that there are strong links between issues and traits, and that these links are not merely the byproduct of elite ideology. Rather, issue ownership is structured, in part, by the moral problems those issues represent (e.g., suffering) and the character traits (e.g., compassion) that are relevant to solving those problems. As a result, there should be strong and widespread links between the issues and character traits that parties own. Alternatively, any issue-trait linkages might be wholly a product of elite behavior, in which case these links should be limited to the politically engaged. I find support for my hypotheses across three studies that include a national sample, within-subjects analyses, and open-ended responses. Issue-trait linkages are not reducible to ideology and persist even among the least politically informed. These findings help explain the structure of issue ownership, why issue ownership is so stable over time, and how politicians might successfully trespass on their opponent’s owned issues.