IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/apsrev/v64y1970i04p1167-1185_13.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Dimensions of Candidate Evaluation

Author

Listed:
  • Weisberg, Herbert F.
  • Rusk, Jerrold G.

Abstract

The story of a presidential election year is in many ways the story of the actions and interactions of those considered as possible candidates for their nation's highest office. If this is true in the abstract, it certainly was true in the election of 1968. The political headlines of 1968 were captured by those who ran for the nominations of their parties, those who pondered over whether or not to run, those who chose to pull out of the race or were struck down during the campaign, those who raised a third party banner, and those who resisted suggestions to run outside the two-party structure. While 1968 may have been unusual in the extent to which many prospective candidates dominated the political scene, every presidential election is, in its own way, highlighted by those considered for the office of President. The political scientist has shown scholarly interest in the candidates. His interest, however, has been selective in its focus—mainly concentrating on the two actual party nominees and not the larger set of possible presidential candidates. Research in electoral behavior has detailed the popular image of the nominees in terms of the public's reactions to their record and experience, personal qualities, and party affiliation. Furthermore, attitudes toward the nominees have been shown to constitute a major short-term influence on the vote. Yet attitudes toward other candidates have been surveyed only to ascertain the behavior of those people who favored someone other than the ultimate nominees.

Suggested Citation

  • Weisberg, Herbert F. & Rusk, Jerrold G., 1970. "Dimensions of Candidate Evaluation," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 64(4), pages 1167-1185, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:apsrev:v:64:y:1970:i:04:p:1167-1185_13
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0003055400133404/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Christopher Hare & Tzu-Ping Liu & Robert N. Lupton, 2018. "What Ordered Optimal Classification reveals about ideological structure, cleavages, and polarization in the American mass public," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 176(1), pages 57-78, July.
    2. Mathew McCubbins & Thomas Schwartz, 1985. "The politics of flatland," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 46(1), pages 45-60, January.
    3. Michele Lalla, 2017. "Fundamental characteristics and statistical analysis of ordinal variables: a review," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 51(1), pages 435-458, January.
    4. Selb, Peter & Herrmann, Michael & Munzert, Simon & Schübel, Thomas & Shikano, Susumu, 2013. "Forecasting runoff elections using candidate evaluations from first round exit polls," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 29(4), pages 541-547.
    5. James Enelow, 1988. "A methodology for testing a new spatial model of elections," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 22(4), pages 347-364, December.
    6. Richard Niemi & Herbert Weisberg, 1974. "Single-peakedness and guttman scales: Concept and measurement," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 20(1), pages 33-45, December.

    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:cup:apsrev:v:64:y:1970:i:04:p:1167-1185_13. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/psr .

    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.