IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/amposc/v64y2020i4p836-851.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

When Do Campaign Effects Persist for Years? Evidence from a Natural Experiment

Author

Listed:
  • Kai Jäger

Abstract

A unique revote allows for a natural experiment to evaluate whether campaign effects can last for nearly a decade: A right‐wing conservative party missed the 5% threshold in a German state by a mere vote in 2007, but the Constitutional Court ordered a revote in a single precinct over potential election fraud. After a one‐sided campaign focusing on law and order, the party's vote share increased more than sixfold. By comparing the precinct with its direct surroundings, the study shows that the revote campaign had long‐lasting effects on vote choice and broader security‐sensitive behavior. Residents in the revote precinct installed more warning signs on their property to deter burglars. They were not more supportive of right‐wing attitudes but were more likely to believe that election fraud reoccurred. Based on habitual‐voting and social‐norm theories, the study suggests that persuasion could be durable if candidates provide an unchallenged interpretation of political events.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:amposc:v:64:y:2020:i:4:p:836-851
    DOI: 10.1111/ajps.12488
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/ajps.12488
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/ajps.12488?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. Jared Barton & Marco Castillo & Ragan Petrie, 2014. "What Persuades Voters? A Field Experiment on Political Campaigning," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 124(574), pages 293-326, February.
    2. Elias Dinas, 2014. "Does Choice Bring Loyalty? Electoral Participation and the Development of Party Identification," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 58(2), pages 449-465, April.
    3. Enos, Ryan D. & Hersh, Eitan D., 2015. "Party Activists as Campaign Advertisers: The Ground Campaign as a Principal-Agent Problem," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 109(2), pages 252-278, May.
    4. Kriesi, Hanspeter, 2002. "Individual Opinion Formation in a Direct Democratic Campaign," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 32(1), pages 171-185, January.
    5. Alexander Coppock & Donald P. Green, 2016. "Is Voting Habit Forming? New Evidence from Experiments and Regression Discontinuities," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 60(4), pages 1044-1062, October.
    6. 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.
    7. 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.
    8. James Adams & Lawrence Ezrow & Zeynep Somer‐Topcu, 2011. "Is Anybody Listening? Evidence That Voters Do Not Respond to European Parties’ Policy Statements During Elections," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 55(2), pages 370-382, April.
    9. Paluck, Elizabeth Levy & Green, Donald P., 2009. "Deference, Dissent, and Dispute Resolution: An Experimental Intervention Using Mass Media to Change Norms and Behavior in Rwanda," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 103(4), pages 622-644, November.
    10. Allcott, Hunt, 2011. "Social norms and energy conservation," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 95(9-10), pages 1082-1095, October.
    11. Gerber, Alan S. & Huber, Gregory A. & Washington, Ebonya, 2010. "Party Affiliation, Partisanship, and Political Beliefs: A Field Experiment," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 104(4), pages 720-744, November.
    12. Benjamin Moffitt & Simon Tormey, 2014. "Rethinking Populism: Politics, Mediatisation and Political Style," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 62(2), pages 381-397, June.
    13. Sears, David O. & Valentino, Nicholas A., 1997. "Politics Matters: Political Events as Catalysts for Preadult Socialization," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 91(1), pages 45-65, March.
    14. Foos, Florian & John, Peter, 2018. "Parties are No Civic Charities: Voter Contact and the Changing Partisan Composition of the Electorate," Political Science Research and Methods, Cambridge University Press, vol. 6(2), pages 283-298, April.
    15. Gerber, Alan S. & Green, Donald P. & Larimer, Christopher W., 2008. "Social Pressure and Voter Turnout: Evidence from a Large-Scale Field Experiment," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 102(1), pages 33-48, February.
    16. Middleton, Joel A., 2008. "Bias of the regression estimator for experiments using clustered random assignment," Statistics & Probability Letters, Elsevier, vol. 78(16), pages 2654-2659, November.
    17. Michael Tesler, 2015. "Priming Predispositions and Changing Policy Positions: An Account of When Mass Opinion Is Primed or Changed," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 59(4), pages 806-824, October.
    18. Green, Donald P. & Shachar, Ron, 2000. "Habit Formation and Political Behaviour: Evidence of Consuetude in Voter Turnout," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 30(4), pages 561-573, October.
    19. Alan S. Gerber & Donald P. Green & Ron Shachar, 2003. "Voting May Be Habit‐Forming: Evidence from a Randomized Field Experiment," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 47(3), pages 540-550, July.
    20. Getmansky, Anna & Zeitzoff, Thomas, 2014. "Terrorism and Voting: The Effect of Rocket Threat on Voting in Israeli Elections," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 108(3), pages 588-604, August.
    21. Allcott, Hunt, 2011. "Social norms and energy conservation," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 95(9), pages 1082-1095.
    22. Alan Gerber & Donald Green & Ron Shachar, 2003. "Voting may be habit forming: Evidence from a randomized field experiment," Natural Field Experiments 00251, The Field Experiments Website.
    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. Sebastian Garmann, 2020. "Political efficacy and the persistence of turnout shocks," Economics and Politics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32(3), pages 411-429, November.
    2. Ethan Kaplan & Fernando Saltiel & Sergio S. Urzúa, 2019. "Voting for Democracy: Chile's Plebiscito and the Electoral Participation of a Generation," NBER Working Papers 26440, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    3. Robert A. Jackson & Matthew Pietryka, 2022. "The influence of becoming a parent on political participation in the United States," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 103(3), pages 565-580, May.
    4. Fosco, Constanza & Laruelle, Annick & Sánchez, Angel, 2009. "Turnout Intention and Social Networks," IKERLANAK info:eu-repo/grantAgreeme, Universidad del País Vasco - Departamento de Fundamentos del Análisis Económico I.
    5. Gäbler, Stefanie & Potrafke, Niklas & Rösel, Felix, 2017. "Compulsory Voting, Voter Turnout and Asymmetrical Habit-formation," VfS Annual Conference 2017 (Vienna): Alternative Structures for Money and Banking 168074, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    6. Pereira dos Santos, João & Tavares, José & Vicente, Pedro C., 2021. "Can ATMs get out the vote? Evidence from a nationwide field experiment," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 134(C).
    7. Gaebler, Stefanie & Potrafke, Niklas & Roesel, Felix, 2020. "Compulsory voting and political participation: Empirical evidence from Austria," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 81(C).
    8. Elizabeth U. Cascio & Na'ama Shenhav, 2020. "A Century of the American Woman Voter: Sex Gaps in Political Participation, Preferences, and Partisanship since Women's Enfranchisement," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 34(2), pages 24-48, Spring.
    9. Fosco, Constanza & Laruelle, Annick & Sánchez, Angel, 2009. "Turnout Intention and Social Networks," IKERLANAK 2009-34, Universidad del País Vasco - Departamento de Fundamentos del Análisis Económico I.
    10. Bamieh, Omar & Cintolesi, Andrea, 2021. "Intergenerational transmission in regulated professions and the role of familism," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 192(C), pages 857-879.
    11. Yoichi Hizen & Kengo Kurosaka, 2021. "Monetary Costs Versus Opportunity Costs in a Voting Experiment," Working Papers SDES-2021-1, Kochi University of Technology, School of Economics and Management, revised Feb 2021.
    12. Valentina A. Bali & Lindon J. Robison & Richard Winder, 2020. "What Motivates People to Vote? The Role of Selfishness, Duty, and Social Motives When Voting," SAGE Open, , vol. 10(4), pages 21582440209, October.
    13. Bhanot, Syon P., 2017. "Rank and response: A field experiment on peer information and water use behavior," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 155-172.
    14. Raj Chetty & Emmanuel Saez & Laszlo Sandor, 2014. "What Policies Increase Prosocial Behavior? An Experiment with Referees at the Journal of Public Economics," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 28(3), pages 169-188, Summer.
    15. Brick, Kerri & De Martino, Samantha & Visser, Martine, 2023. "Behavioural nudges for water conservation in unequal settings: Experimental evidence from Cape Town," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 121(C).
    16. Leonardo Bursztyn & Robert Jensen, 2017. "Social Image and Economic Behavior in the Field: Identifying, Understanding, and Shaping Social Pressure," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 9(1), pages 131-153, September.
    17. Kevin Denny & Orla Doyle, 2009. "Does Voting History Matter? Analysing Persistence in Turnout," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 53(1), pages 17-35, January.
    18. Goette, Lorenz & Tiefenbeck, Verena & Degen, Kathrin & Fleisch, Elgar & Tasic, Vojkan & Lalive, Rafael & Staake, Thorsten, 2016. "Overcoming Salience Bias: How Real-Time Feedback Fosters Resource Conservation," CEPR Discussion Papers 11480, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    19. Arnstein Aassve & Gianmarco Daniele & Marco Le Moglie, 2018. "Never Forget the First Time: The Persistent Effects of Corruption and the Rise of Populism in Italy," BAFFI CAREFIN Working Papers 1896, BAFFI CAREFIN, Centre for Applied Research on International Markets Banking Finance and Regulation, Universita' Bocconi, Milano, Italy.
    20. Perez-Truglia, Ricardo & Troiano, Ugo, 2018. "Shaming tax delinquents," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 167(C), pages 120-137.

    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:wly:amposc:v:64:y:2020:i:4:p:836-851. 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: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1540-5907 .

    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.