Abstract
Candidates and campaign strategists believe that negative campaigning works—negative messages depress citizen's evaluations of targeted candidates. However, scholars have been unable to validate consistently the claims of practitioners. To better understand how negative campaigning influences the electorate, it is necessary to consider the relevance and civility of negative messages. In particular, do citizens make distinctions concerning the relevance and civility of campaign messages? If so, do citizens' views about the relevance and civility of negative messages influence how they evaluate candidates? We rely on an experimental research design embedded in a public opinion survey to examine people's reactions to negative commercials. Based on a national survey of nearly 700 respondents, we find citizens differentiate between negative advertisements in meaningful and consistent ways. Furthermore, the civility and relevance of the negative commercials significantly influences people's evaluations of the targeted candidates in several ways, including trait, affect, and issue evaluations.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
