IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/woraff/v180y2017i3p72-96.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

WHOSE ISSUE IS IT ANYWAY… AND DOES IT REALLY MATTER? Issue Ownership and Negative Campaigning

Author

Listed:
  • Stephen C. Craig
  • Paulina S. Cossette

Abstract

Although academic research has yielded mixed results, candidates and consultants are rational people whose experience persuades them that “going negative” can be an effective campaign strategy under the right circumstances. And they are almost certainly right, even if their evidence is more anecdotal than systematic. This article considers whether the impact of negative ads is moderated by perceptions of issue ownership, a factor that is known to affect the candidate preferences of some voters. Focusing on the attitudes of those who identify with the party of the targeted candidate, we examine the changes in support and favorability induced by four policy‐based attacks against a hypothetical congressional incumbent seeking reelection. Results from an Internet survey experiment suggest that attacks are somewhat more effective among target co‐partisans who do not believe that their party is more competent to handle the issue in question, especially when that issue is salient to the individual. A pesar de que la investigación académica haya dado resultados mixtos, los candidatos y los consultores son personas racionales cuya experiencia los convence que la ‘publicidad negativa’ puede ser una estrategia de campaña efectiva bajo las circunstancias adecuadas. Y en general tienen mucha razón, inclusive si su evidencia es más anecdótica que sistemática. Este artículo considera si el impacto de la publicidad negativa es moderado por percepciones de atribución de los temas, un factor que tiene la reputación de afectar las preferencias de candidato de algunos electores. Enfocándose en las actitudes de los que se identifican con el partido del candidato al que se dirige la publicidad, examinamos los cambios en apoyo y favorabilidad que inducen cuatro ataques basados en la política contra un candidato titular hipotético que busca la reelección. Los resultados de una encuesta experimental por internet sugieren que los ataques son un poco más efectivos en las personas del mismo partido que no piensan que su partido es más competente para resolver el problema en cuestión, especialmente cuando ese problema es importante para el individuo. 尽管学术研究产生了许多意见不一的结果, 但候选人和咨询顾问在面对竞选时却十分理性, 他们的经历告诉他们在正确的情况下实行”负面竞选”可以是一项有效的竞选策略。他们几乎是完全正确的, 即便其给出的依据比较零散, 不成体系。本文考虑了负面政治广告的影响力是否会受到议题所有权概念的调和, 后者是一种能影响部分选民对候选人偏爱程度的因素。本文聚焦于一部分人的态度(这部分人将自身视为目标候选人党派的成员), 并对一项理论性的国会现任成员再次选举进行四次基于策略的抨击, 进而检验抨击对选民支持度和偏爱度产生的变化。一项网络调查实验结果显示, 抨击在某种程度上对目标党派人士更为有效, 后者不相信其所属党派能更好地处理被质疑的议题, 当议题对个人而言十分重要时更是如此。

Suggested Citation

  • Stephen C. Craig & Paulina S. Cossette, 2017. "WHOSE ISSUE IS IT ANYWAY… AND DOES IT REALLY MATTER? Issue Ownership and Negative Campaigning," World Affairs, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 180(3), pages 72-96, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:woraff:v:180:y:2017:i:3:p:72-96
    DOI: 10.1177/0043820017750209
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1177/0043820017750209
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0043820017750209?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
    ---><---

    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:woraff:v:180:y:2017:i:3:p:72-96. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.