Due to a simplistic conception of candidate imagery and overreliance on survey methods in voting research, relatively little is known about the dynamics of candidate imagery. This experiment exposed subjects to typewritten transcripts of candidate issue positions from an actual campaign, and measures of subjects' candidate images were taken. Results indi cate that subjects are prone to conceptualize candidates in personal terms, even though only issue-position information was made available. This tendency appears to be affected by the volume and content of issue-position information to which subjects are exposed. If these findings apply to the general population, researchers may have to reformulate the "issue voting" controversy in voting research.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Asher, H. (1976) Presidential Elections and American Politics. Homewood, IL: Dorsey Press.
2.
Boyd, R.W. (1969) "Presidential elections: An explanation of voting defection." Amer. Pol. Sci. Rev. 63: 498-514.
3.
Brownstein, C.N. (1971) "Communication strategies and the electoral decision-making process: Some results from experimentation." Experimental Study of Politics1 (July): 37-51.
4.
Campbell, D.T. and J.C. Stanley (1966) Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Designs for Research. Skokie, IL: Rand McNally .
5.
Carmines, E.G. and J.A. Stimson (1980) "Two faces of issue voting." Amer. Pol. Sci. Rev. 74: 78-91.
6.
Carter, R.F. (1962) "Some effects of the debates," pp. 253-270 in S. Kraus (ed.) The Great Debates.Bloomington: Univ. of Indiana Press.
7.
Conve Rse, P.E. (1970) "Attitudes and non-attitudes: Continuation of a dialogue," pp. 168-189 in E. R. Tufte (ed.) Quantitative Analysis of Social Problems.Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
8.
——— (1964) "The nature of belief systems in mass publics," pp. 206-261 in D. Apter (ed.) Ideology and Discontent.New York: Free Press.
9.
——— W.E. Miller, J.G. Rusk, and A.C. Wolfe (1969) "Continuity and change in American politics: Parties and issues in the 1968 election." Amer. Pol. Sci. Rev.63: 1083-1105.
10.
Cook, T.D. and D.T. Campbell (1975) "The design and conduct of quasi-experiments and true experiments in field settings," pp. 223-326 in M. D. Dunnette (ed.) Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology. Skokie, IL: Rand McNally.
11.
DeClercq, E.L., L.T. Hurley, and N.R. Luttbeg (1975) "Voting in American presidential elections: 1956-72 ." Amer. Politics Q. 3: 31-46.
12.
Inter-University Consortium for Political and Social Research (1972) 1972 SRC Election Study Codebook . Ann Arbor: niv. of Michigan.
13.
——— (1964) 1964 SRC Election Study CodebookAnn Arbor: Univ. of Michigan.
14.
Jones, R.S. and T.E. Jones (1971) "Issue salience, opinion holding and party preference ." Western Pol. Q. 24: 501-509.
15.
Kelley, S., Jr., and T.W. Mirer (1974) "The simple act of voting" Amer. Pol. Sci. Rev.68: 572-592.
16.
Kessel, J.H. (1972) "Comment: The issues in issue voting." Amer. Pol. Sci. Rev. 66: 459-465.
17.
Key, V.O. (1966) The Responsible ElectorateCambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press.
18.
Kirkpatrick, S.A., W. Lyons, and M.R. Fitzgerald (1975) "Candidates, parties, and issues in the American electorate: Two decades of change." Amer. Politics Q. 3: 247-284.
19.
Macaluso, T.F. (1975) "Candidate image: Personal attribute and issue content." Presented at the meeting of the Southern Political Science Association, Nashville, November.
20.
McGuire, W.J. (1973) "Persuasion, resistance, and attitude change," pp. 216-252 in I. de Sola Pool et al. (eds.) Handbook of Communication.Skokie, IL: Rand McNally.
21.
Miller, G.A. (1956) "The magical number seven, plus or minus two." Psych. Rev. 63: 81-89.
22.
Miller, W.E. and T.E. Levitan (1976) Leadership and ChangeCambridge, MA: Winthrop Publishers.
23.
Natchez, P.B. and I.C. Bupp (1970) "Candidates, issues, and voters," pp. 427-451 in E. C. Dreyer and W. A. Rosenbaum (eds.) Political Opinion and Behavior. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
24.
Nie, N.H., S. Verba and J.R. Petrocik (1976) The Changing American VoterCambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press.
25.
Nimmo, D. and R.L. Savage (1976) Candidates and Their ImagesSanta Monica, CA: Goodyear.
26.
——— (1971) "Political images and political perceptions." Experimental Study of Politics1(July): 1-36.
27.
Page, B.I. and R.L. Brody (1971) "Policy voting and the electoral process: The Vietnam war issue." Amer. Pol. Sci. Rev. 66: 979-995.
28.
Patterson, T.E. (1980) The Mass Media Election. New York: Praeger.
29.
Repass, D.E. (1971) "Issue salience and party choice." Amer. Pol. Sci. Rev.65: 389-400.
30.
Rosenthal, R. (1967) Experimenter Effects in Behavioral ResearchEnglewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
31.
Schroeder, H.M., M.J. Driver, and S. Struefert (1967) Human Information ProcessingNew York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
32.
Sears, D.O. and R.E. Whitney (1973) "Political persuasion," pp. 253-289 in I. de Sola Pool et al. (eds.) Handbook of Communications. Skokie, IL: Rand McNally.
33.
Sigel, R.S. (1964) "Effect of partisanship on the perception of political candidates." Public Opinion Q. 28: 483-496.
34.
Simon, H.A. (1974) "How big is a chunk?" Science183: 482-488.
35.
Stimson, J.A. (1975) "Belief systems: Constraint, complexity, and the 1972 election." Amer. J. of Pol. Sci.19: 393-417.
36.
Stokes, D.E. (1966) "Some dynamic elements of contests for the presidency " Amer. Pol. Sci. Rev.60: 19-29.
37.
Tagiuri, R. (1968) "Person perception," pp. 395-449 in G. Lindzey and E. Aronson (eds.) The Handbook of Social Psychology (Vol. 3). Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
38.
Warr, P.B. and C. Knapper (1968) The Perception of People and EventsNew York: John Wiley.
39.
Weisberg, H.F. and J.G. Rusk (1970) "Dimensions of candidate evaluations." Amer. Pol. Sci. Rev.64: 1167-1185.
40.
Zajonc, R.B. (1960) "The process of cognitive tuning in communication ." J. of Abnormal and Social Psychology61: 159-167.
