Evaluations Of Presidential Candidates Research Articles

The Personalization of Electoral Participation? The Relationship Between Trait Evaluations of Presidential Candidates and Turnout Decisions in American Presidential Elections 1980–2020

AbstractThe personalization thesis claims that leaders’ influence over voters has increased. While research consistently shows that candidates influence party choice, we know little about their effects on the prior decision to turn out in elections. This article represents the first study to examine the relationship between candidate trait evaluations and turnout decisions in the American context and the first longitudinal study of the phenomenon. The study utilizes ANES data to test three hypotheses drawn from theories on electoral participation and personalized politics in U.S. presidential elections between 1980 and 2020. The results show that while trait evaluations of Republican candidates consistently affect turnout, perceptions of Democratic candidates’ competence mobilize voters in specific elections. Moreover, individual polarization promotes turnout, particularly among partisan dealigned voters with different perceptions of the candidates’ competence. The results indicate a personalization of electoral participation that can benefit civic engagement and democratic quality.

Do Leader Evaluations (De)Mobilize Voter Turnout? Lessons From Presidential Elections in the United States

Do evaluations of presidential candidates in the US affect the level of voter turnout? Voters’ affections towards presidential candidates, we contend, can either stimulate or inhibit voter inclinations to turnout. Voters are more inclined to turn out when they have positive feelings towards the candidate with which they identify because they want “their” candidate to win. But citizens may also be more likely to vote when they dislike the candidate of the party with which they do not identify. In that case, voters are motivated to prevent the candidate from being elected. Utilizing the American National Election Studies data for 1968–2020, the analysis finds that the likelihood of voting is affected by (a) the degree to which voters’ affections towards the candidate differ from one another (having a clear‐cut choice between options) and (b) the nature of the affections (negative or positive) towards both in‐ and out‐party candidates.

Candidate Evaluations and Social Media Following during the 2020 Presidential Campaign

This study investigates the relationship between presidential candidate evaluations and following the candidates on five social media (SM) platforms: Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Snapchat, and YouTube. Analyses of national survey data collected during the 2020 presidential campaign (N = 2,120) suggest that following a candidate on SM is positively associated with feelings toward that candidate, even after gender, age, race, education, party identification, and online news media use have been taken into consideration. Specifically, individuals who followed Trump on Facebook, Twitter, and/or YouTube supported him more than did those who did not follow him. Following Biden on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and/or Snapchat was positively associated with his feeling thermometer ratings after demographic variables, party identification, and online news media use were controlled. Moreover, we show that these positive relationships were more pronounced among those who did not identify with one of the major political parties. Following a candidate, however, was not necessarily associated with decreased support for the opposing candidate. Overall, our results highlight the importance of politicians’ use of social media during campaigns and suggest that following candidates on different SM platforms has unique relationships with candidate evaluations.

The electoral consequences of anti-Muslim prejudice

A growing body of research has documented the development of pervasive anti-Muslim sentiment among White Americans. We build on this research to demonstrate that anti-Muslim attitudes and negative stereotypes of Muslim people have become an enduring and consistent component of White Americans' presidential vote choice beyond any one specific candidate or election. We argue that the racialization of Muslim Americas has increased their salience and significance in both the minds of White Americans and in national political discourse, making attitudes toward Muslims a consistent predictor of Whites’ presidential candidate evaluations in every election since at least 2004. We support this account with empirical evidence from the 2004–2020 American National Election Studies, using measures of group affect and negative stereotypes of Muslim people.

Testing and unpacking the effects of digital fake news: on presidential candidate evaluations and voter support

There is growing worldwide concern that the rampant spread of digital fake news (DFN) via new media technologies is detrimentally impacting Democratic elections. However, the actual influence of this recent Internet phenomenon on electoral decisions has not been directly examined. Accordingly, this study tested the effects of attention to DFN on readers’ Presidential candidate preferences via an experimental web-survey administered to a cross-sectional American sample (N = 552). Results showed no main effect of exposure to DFN on participants’ candidate evaluations or vote choice. However, the perceived believability of DFN about the Democratic candidate negatively mediated evaluations of that candidate—especially amongst far-right ideologues. These results suggest that DFN may at worst reinforce the partisan dispositions of mostly politically conservative Internet users, but does not cause or induce conversions in these dispositions. Overall, this study contributes novel experimental evidence, indicating that the potential electoral impact of DFN, although concerning, is strongly conditional on a reciprocal interaction between message receptibility and a pre-existing right-wing ideological orientation. The said impact is, therefore, likely narrow in scope.

In-Group Love and Out-Group Hate: White Racial Attitudes in Contemporary U.S. Elections

Over the past two decades, political scientists have demonstrated that racial animus among white Americans is increasingly associated with evaluations of presidential candidates. Like most work on white racial attitudes, these efforts have focused almost exclusively on the out-group attitudes whites possess toward racial and ethnic minorities. Work in social psychology, however, suggests that intergroup attitudes are usually comprised of both an out-group and an in-group component. Nevertheless, political scientists have tended to overlook or dismiss the possibility that whites’ in-group attitudes are associated with political evaluations. Changing demographic patterns, immigration, the historic election of Obama, and new candidate efforts to appeal to whites as a collective group suggest a need to reconsider the full nature and consequences of the racial attitudes that may influence whites’ electoral preferences. This study, therefore, examines the extent to which both white out-group racial resentment and white in-group racial identity matter in contemporary electoral politics. Comparing the factors associated with vote choice in 2012 and 2016, and candidate evaluations in 2018, this study finds that both attitudes were powerfully associated with candidate evaluations in 2012 and early 2016, although white out-group attitudes overshadowed the electoral impact of in-group racial attitudes by the 2016 general election. The results suggest that there are now two independent racial attitudes tied to whites’ political preferences in the contemporary U.S., and understanding the dynamics of white racial animus and white racial identity across electoral contexts continues to be an important avenue for future work.

Did the “Road to the White House Run Through” Letterman? Chris Christie, Letterman, and Other-Disparaging Versus Self-Deprecating Humor

In this article we present the results of an experiment designed to disentangle the effects late-night talk show viewership have on presidential candidate evaluations. Respondents in one condition viewed a short video clip of David Letterman humorously disparaging New Jersey Governor Chris Christie, thought by many at the time to be considering a run for the presidency in 2016. Those in a second condition saw a short clip of Christie engaging in self-deprecating humor while appearing as a guest on Letterman's program. Compared with respondents in a control condition, those in the other-disparaging humor condition had lower evaluations of Christie and reported a lower likelihood of voting for him in 2016, while those in the self-deprecating humor condition had higher evaluations of him and expressed a greater likelihood of voting for him. The research has practical implications for modern campaigns and also serves to clarify some of the seemingly contradictory findings of earlier political humor effects research.

The Impact of Prolonged Nomination Contests on Presidential Candidate Evaluations and General Election Vote Choice: The Case of 2008

The fact that political parties hold competitive nomination contests that require voters to choose among multiple candidates leaves open the possibility that the contest itself could damage the prospects of an eventual nominee. In this study, we employ the American National Election Study panel survey data from the 2008 U.S. presidential election to assess the impact of the Democratic Party nomination process on candidate evaluations and general election vote preference. We find evidence that Barack Obama had greater difficulty uniting his party than his Republican counterpart due to the fact that Clinton voters were slow to coalesce around Obama. These supporters failed to report higher levels of favorability until Clinton conceded the race in the summer, while Huckabee and Romney voters were seen rallying to their party's nominee in the spring. In the end, many Clinton primary voters either abstained from voting in November or crossed over to support the Republican nominee.El hecho de que los partidos políticos realicen contiendas de nominaciones competitivas que exijan a los votantes elegir entre múltiples candidatos crea la posibilidad de que la contienda en sí misma perjudique las expectativas del candidato ganador. En este estudio, empleamos datos de una encuesta de ANES sobre las elecciones presidenciales del 2008 en los Estados Unidos para determinar el impacto del proceso de nominación presidencial del Partido Demócrata en la evaluación de los candidatos y las preferencias electorales generales. Encontramos evidencia de que Barack Obama tuvo una mayor dificultad unificando su partido que su equivalente Republicano debido a que partidarios de Clinton fueron lentos en sumarse a Obama. Estos partidarios no reportaron altos niveles de apoyo hasta que Clinton confirió la contienda en el verano, mientras que partidarios de Huckabee y Romney se concentraron en el candidato de su partido desde la primavera. Al final, muchos votantes adeptos a Clinton se abstuvieron de votar en noviembre o decidieron apoyar al candidato Republicano.

미국 대통령 후보자의 자립정신과 인격적 특성에 대한 유권자 평가

이 연구는 미국 오하이오주 포티지 카운티의 유권자들을 대상으로 한 실험연구를 통해 미국 대통령 후보자의 자립정신이 그들의 캐릭터를 구성하는 인격적 특성에 대한 유권자들의 평가에 어떤 영향을 미치는지 분석해 보았다. 이를 통해 이 연구는 미국인의 문화적 가치인 자립정신이 미국의 선거정치에 미치는 영향력을 가늠해 보았다. 연구결과, 미국 대통령 후보자의 자립정신은 이 연구에서 제시된 11개의 인격적 특성 중 정직성, 신뢰성, 동정심을 제외한 나머지 8개 인격적 특성에 대한 평가에서 의미있는 영향을 미치는 것으로 나타났다. 구체적으로, 미국 대통령후보자의 자립정신은 이들의 능력, 독립성, 결단력, 애국심, 리더십, 카리스마에 대한 유권자들의 평가에 큰 영향을 미치는 것으로 나타났다. 특히 미국 대통령 후보자의 자립정신은 그들의 카리스마에 가장 큰 영향을 미치는 것으로 나타났다. 이 분야에 대한 실증적 연구를 찾아보기 어려운 상황에서 이 연구는 미국인의 문화적 가치, 특히 자립정신이 그들의 선거정치에 미치는 영향력과 정당성을 확인하는 중요한 증거를 제시하고 있다. In the United States, a marked emphasis on personal achievement has been among enduring values characterizing American culture from the beginning of the republic. Particularly, Americans have attached great value to the spirit of self-reliance in striving for personal achievement. However, there have been few empirical studies focusing on the effects of Americans' self-reliant spirit on American electoral politics. Through a field experimentation focusing on the voters of Portage County in Ohio, this study examined the effects of Americans' self-reliant spirit on the evaluations of presidential candidates' personal traits, which constitute the candidates' character. The results of this study demonstrated that American voters evaluated those presidential candidates who were described as self-reliant significantly more favorably than the presidential candidates who were not so described, for 8 out of the 11 personal traits. The findings provide meaningful evidence for ascertaining the potential and legitimacy of the influences of the spirit of self-reliance, in the American society including electoral politics.

Polls and Elections: Editorial Cartoons 2.0: The Effects of Digital Political Satire on Presidential Candidate Evaluations

While the number of full‐time editorial cartoonists has declined in the past few decades, several have taken their craft online in the form of animated Flash cartoons. In this article I test the effects of one of the more popular animated editorial cartoons on presidential candidate evaluations of 18‐ to 24‐year‐olds. A posttest‐only experimental design was used to survey students from several universities in six states. The results from this online experiment suggest that these editorial cartoons have a negative effect on candidate evaluations. However, viewing the clip did not change candidate preferences and an analysis of the control group suggests that viewership of online humor may have a positive effect on political participation.

Expertise, Evaluative Motivation, and the Structure of Citizens’ Ideological Commitments

Political psychologists have typically argued that ideological commitments are structured in a bipolar fashion, where a positive evaluation of conservative objects implies a negative evaluation of liberal objects (and vice versa). Individual differences in conformity to this pattern are usually attributed to an ability‐related variable, i.e., political expertise. Departing from this strict focus on ability, this study examines the hypotheses that an important motivational variable—the need to evaluate, or the desire to form opinions of objects as “good” or “bad”—would (1) predict deviations from ideological bipolarity, even controlling for expertise; and (2) moderate the relationship between expertise and deviations from bipolarity. Data from two national surveys provided evidence for these hypotheses and indicated that the results extended to deviations from bipolarity in evaluations of presidential candidates and political parties.

No Place for a Woman: Evidence for Gender Bias in Evaluations of Presidential Candidates

In the 110th Congress, 16% of United State Senators are women. In contrast, the role of President of the United States of America has always been occupied by a man. As such, being a man is the one common attribute to all successful presidential candidates, rendering “male” a necessary qualification for the role. The gender-incongruency hypothesis predicts that gender bias is less likely in domains such as the Senate where women are relatively more prevalent. However, in the case of the presidency, the potential exists for gender bias against women presidential candidates. Using an experimental, single-candidate, design we tested the hypotheses that young voters would similarly evaluate a man and woman candidate for Senate (Study 1) but negatively evaluate a presidential candidate's resume ascribed to a woman, compared to the same resume ascribed to a man (Study 2). Results confirmed the gender-incongruency hypothesis and suggest that although bias may be less evident in evaluations of some Senate candidates, gender bias remains a significant obstacle for women presidential candidates.

“It's the electability, stupid” − or maybe not? Electability, substance, and strategic voting in presidential primaries

In an experiment that tests the effects of different information on the role of electability and policy considerations in people's evaluations of presidential candidates, we find that both substance and electability affect those assessments. In the context of the 2004 Democratic presidential primary, evaluations of candidates by more politically sophisticated partisans were affected by the experimental treatment that mentioned the traditional Democratic issue of social security, whereas less sophisticated respondents were more affected by the issue treatment that mentioned the economy. Because both groups were affected by positive electability information, we find some evidence of strategic considerations in voters' decision-making processes. In contrast to complaints that citizens do not use substantive information when assessing candidates in presidential nomination campaigns, we find that presidential primary candidates' electability and issue emphases both matter.

Awareness, Partisanship and the Post-Convention Bounce: A Memory-Based Model of Post-Convention Presidential Candidate Evaluations Part II—Empirical Results

This paper continues an analysis, begun in the December 2004 issue, that employed panel data to estimate the effects of awareness and political partisanship on post-convention candidate evaluations. The derivation of a theoretical framework was discussed in Part 1 [1]. Empirical results using data from the US presidential election of 2000 are discussed in the present article. We find that partisans of the opposite party were more resistant to the convention message of Bush than Gore, that awareness played a greater role in determining a predicted post-convention change for Gore, and that Gore’s message was received and accepted at a higher rate than Bush’s message.

Awareness, Partisanship and the Post-Convention Bounce: A Memory-Based Model of Post-Convention Presidential Candidate Evaluations Part 1—Introduction & Theoretical Analysis

This paper employs panel data to estimate the effects of awareness and political partisanship on post-convention candidate evaluations. The theoretical framework proposed by John Zaller (1992) is employed; however, a functional form that differs greatly from Zaller’s proposed model is derived from Zaller’s assumption and then estimated using standard OLS regression. I find that partisans of the opposite party were more resistant to the convention message of Bush than Gore, awareness plays a greater role in determining predicted post-convention change for Gore, and that Gore’s message was received and accepted at a higher rate than Bush’s message.

Voting Preferences and the Environment in the American Electorate: The Discussion Extended

Accepted wisdom has it that the issue of environmental quality has little or no impact on national elections. In the only systematic statistical analysis addressing the subject, Guber (2001) concluded that the environment did not have a significant impact on assessments of presidential candidates, and that the potential for issue voting on the environment was quite limited. Utilizing the same survey data, this research reexamines the environment's influence on citizens' assessments of presidential candidates and, in turn, voters' choices. A review of survey respondents' perceptions of the environment suggests the substitution of a different environment variable into Guber's original model. This revision confirms the impact of the environment on both citizens' evaluations of presidential candidates and their presidential votes. The article concludes with a discussion of the implications of these new findings in light of past research, focusing on the framing and perception of the issue of environmental quality.

Requiem for a Lightweight: Vice Presidential Candidate Evaluations and the Presidential Vote

Requiem for a Lightweight: Vice Presidential Candidate Evaluations and the Presidential Vote

Requiem for a Lightweight: Vice Presidential Candidate Evaluations and the Presidential Vote

Presidential election scholars have recently begun to explore whether vice presidential nominees have a meaningful influence on the presidential vote. Their findings are in conflict. Aggregate‐level analyses find little support for the hypothesis that vice presidential candidates bring their ticket any regional or home state advantage. Individual‐level analyses, on the other hand, find that vice presidential nominees have a surprisingly powerful influence on the typical voter's vote for president. These conflicting findings suggest that either aggregate‐level results underestimate vice presidential nominees' influence on the vote or that individual‐level results overestimate vice presidential nominees' influence on the vote. The author assumes it is the latter. Based on this assumption, the author reexamines whether vice presidential candidates influence the individual vote for president. Once rationalization affects are controlled, it is found that vice presidential candidates have no influence on the voters' choice for president.

Source credibility and presidential candidates in 1996: The changing nature of character and empathy evaluations

This study examines the importance of character, competence, empathy, and leadership in evaluations of presidential candidates in 1996. Public opinion research suggests changes in the importance and meaning of character in candidate evaluations. The results of this study strongly support distinctions between character‐generated liking of a candidate and vote choice among respondents in 1996. Results also suggest that perceptions of candidate empathy played a larger role in evaluations than in previous elections. Implications of these findings include the need for renewed political communication research on the importance and conceptualization of character and empathy, and the extension of current theory to explain differences in affective candidate evaluations and vote choice.

Attentiveness to television news and opinion change in the fall 1992 presidential campaign

This paper examines the extent to which attention to television news impacted affective evaluations of presidential candidates during the last two months of the 1992 campaign. Our analyses show that attentiveness to campaign news significantly influenced evaluations in a manner consistent with the tone of news coverage for each candidate. We disaggregate the data by party and ideology, however, and discover this effect to be conditional, depending critically on the character and intensity of political predispositions. Throughout the paper we emphasize the interplay between political predispositions and the valence of network coverage, underscoring the contingent effect of media messages. We conclude with a brief discussion of our results and stress the importance of partisan reinforcement, which we found was a major consequence of news media reception during the fall 1992 campaign.