IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/socsci/v105y2024i4p1076-1091.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Timing and responsiveness in American political advertising campaigns

Author

Listed:
  • Kevin K. Banda

Abstract

ObjectiveThough candidates for political office use their campaigns to appeal to voters, they are unable to do so uninterrupted. Prior research suggests that they must respond to the advertising strategies employed by their opponents when determining their own strategies. How does this responsiveness vary across the campaign cycle? MethodsI test how general election television advertising responsiveness varies over the course of the campaign cycle using data from 256 U.S. Senate and gubernatorial contests. ResultsThe results of my analyses show that candidates' overall, negative, and (to an extent) issue‐based advertising strategies become less informed by their opponents' strategies as Election Day approaches. ConclusionsThese findings suggest that candidates use the early stages of their campaigns to find effective general advertising strategies and become less responsive to their opponents once they have done so. In other words, campaigns appear to stay on message to a greater extent as the campaign unfolds.

Suggested Citation

  • Kevin K. Banda, 2024. "Timing and responsiveness in American political advertising campaigns," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 105(4), pages 1076-1091, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:socsci:v:105:y:2024:i:4:p:1076-1091
    DOI: 10.1111/ssqu.13391
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/ssqu.13391
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/ssqu.13391?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Brambor, Thomas & Clark, William Roberts & Golder, Matt, 2006. "Understanding Interaction Models: Improving Empirical Analyses," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 14(1), pages 63-82, January.
    2. Lee Sigelman & Emmett H. Buell, 2004. "Avoidance or Engagement? Issue Convergence in U.S. Presidential Campaigns, 1960–2000," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 48(4), pages 650-661, October.
    3. Gelman, Andrew & King, Gary, 1993. "Why Are American Presidential Election Campaign Polls So Variable When Votes Are So Predictable?," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 23(4), pages 409-451, October.
    4. Kalla, Joshua L. & Broockman, David E., 2018. "The Minimal Persuasive Effects of Campaign Contact in General Elections: Evidence from 49 Field Experiments," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 112(1), pages 148-166, February.
    5. Gerber, Alan S. & Gimpel, James G. & Green, Donald P. & Shaw, Daron R., 2011. "How Large and Long-lasting Are the Persuasive Effects of Televised Campaign Ads? Results from a Randomized Field Experiment," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 105(1), pages 135-150, February.
    6. Paul Freedman & Michael Franz & Kenneth Goldstein, 2004. "Campaign Advertising and Democratic Citizenship," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 48(4), pages 723-741, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Caroline Le Pennec & Vincent Pons, 2023. "How do Campaigns Shape Vote Choice? Multicountry Evidence from 62 Elections and 56 TV Debates," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 138(2), pages 703-767.
    2. Baum, Charles L. & Owens, Mark F., 2023. "Does personal door-to-door campaigning influence voters? Evidence from a field experiment," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 105(C).
    3. Avidit Acharya & Edoardo Grillo & Takuo Sugaya & Eray Turkel, 2019. "Dynamic Campaign Spending," Carlo Alberto Notebooks 601, Collegio Carlo Alberto.
    4. Kai Jäger, 2020. "When Do Campaign Effects Persist for Years? Evidence from a Natural Experiment," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 64(4), pages 836-851, October.
    5. Jörg L. Spenkuch & David Toniatti, 2016. "Political Advertising and Election Outcomes," CESifo Working Paper Series 5780, CESifo.
    6. Beknazar-Yuzbashev, George & Stalinski, Mateusz, 2022. "Do social media ads matter for political behavior? A field experiment," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 214(C).
    7. Wilson Law, 2021. "Decomposing political advertising effects on vote choices," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 188(3), pages 525-547, September.
    8. Brett R. Gordon & Wesley R. Hartmann, 2013. "Advertising Effects in Presidential Elections," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(1), pages 19-35, June.
    9. Avidit Acharya & Takuo Sugaya & Eray Turkel, 2022. "Electoral Campaigns as Dynamic Contests," "Marco Fanno" Working Papers 0293, Dipartimento di Scienze Economiche "Marco Fanno".
    10. Brett Gordon & Mitchell Lovett & Ron Shachar & Kevin Arceneaux & Sridhar Moorthy & Michael Peress & Akshay Rao & Subrata Sen & David Soberman & Oleg Urminsky, 2012. "Marketing and politics: Models, behavior, and policy implications," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 23(2), pages 391-403, June.
    11. Donald Wittman, 2009. "How Pressure Groups Activate Voters and Move Candidates Closer to the Median," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 119(540), pages 1324-1343, October.
    12. Matthias Fatke, 2013. "Participation and Political Equality in Direct Democracy: Educative Effect or Social Bias," University of Bern Social Sciences Working Papers 3, University of Bern, Department of Social Sciences.
    13. Mijeong Baek, 2009. "A Comparative Analysis of Political Communication Systems and Voter Turnout," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 53(2), pages 376-393, April.
    14. Isabelle Guinaudeau & Anna M Palau, 2016. "A matter of conflict: How events and parties shape the news coverage of EU affairs," European Union Politics, , vol. 17(4), pages 593-615, December.
    15. Dunning, Thad & Grossman, Guy & Humphreys, Macartan & Hyde, Susan D. & McIntosh, Craig & Nellis, Gareth & Adida, Claire L. & Arias, Eric & Bicalho, Clara & Boas, Taylor C. & Buntaine, Mark T. & Chauch, 2019. "Voter information campaigns and political accountability: Cumulative findings from a preregistered meta-analysis of coordinated trials," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 5(7), pages 1-10.
    16. Juan Pablo Atal & José Ignacio Cuesta & Felipe González & Cristóbal Otero, 2024. "The Economics of the Public Option: Evidence from Local Pharmaceutical Markets," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 114(3), pages 615-644, March.
    17. Andrew Boutton, 2019. "Of terrorism and revenue: Why foreign aid exacerbates terrorism in personalist regimes," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 36(4), pages 359-384, July.
    18. Tiziana La Rocca & Maurizio La Rocca & Francesco Fasano & Alfio Cariola, 2023. "Does a country's environmental policy affect the value of small and medium sized enterprises liquidity in the energy sector?," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 30(1), pages 277-290, January.
    19. Cruzatti C., John & Bjørnskov, Christian & Sáenz de Viteri, Andrea & Cruzatti, Christian, 2024. "Geography, development, and power: Parliament leaders and local clientelism," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 182(C).
    20. David A. M. Peterson, 2009. "Campaign Learning and Vote Determinants," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 53(2), pages 445-460, April.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:socsci:v:105:y:2024:i:4:p:1076-1091. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0038-4941 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.