A substantial literature has used field experiments to assess the mobilization effects of non-partisan mailers. However, little work has examined whether partisan mailers affect voters as intended. We report findings from two field experiments conducted in cooperation with partisan campaign strategists that allow us to assess the effects of negative and positive mailers. We find that mailers can affect voters—particularly their recognition of candidate names and their intent to turn out to vote. Notably, we find evidence that both negative and positive mailers stimulate intent to turn out.
AnsolabehereStephenIyengarShantoSimonAdam. 1999. “Replicating Experiments Using Aggregate and Survey Data: The Case of Negative Advertising and Turnout.” American Political Science Review93:901–909.
2.
AnsolabehereStephenIyengarShantoSimonAdamValentinoNicholas. 1994. “Does Attack Advertising Demobilize the Electorate?” American Political Science Review88:829–38.
3.
ArceneauxKevin. 2007. “I’m Asking for Your Support: The Effects of Personally Delivered Campaign Messages on Voting Decisions and Opinion Formation.” Quarterly Journal of Political Science2:43–65.
4.
ArceneauxKevin. 2010. “The Benefits of Experimental Methods for the Study of Campaign Effects.” Political Communication27:199–215.
5.
ArceneauxKevinKolodnyRobin. 2009a. “Educating the Least Informed: Group Endorsements in a Grassroots Campaign.” American Journal of Political Science53:755–70.
6.
ArceneauxKevinKolodnyRobin. 2009b. “The Effect of Grassroots Campaigning on Issue Preferences and Issue Salience.” Journal of Elections, Public Opinion and Parties19:235–49.
7.
ArceneauxKevinNickersonDavid. 2010. “Comparing Negative and Positive Campaign Messages: Evidence from Two Field Experiments.” American Politics Research38:54–83.
8.
BarabasJasonJeritJennifer. 2010. “Are Survey Experiments Externally Valid?”American Political Science Review104:226–42.
9.
BraderTed. 2005. “Striking a Responsive Chord: How Political Ads Motivate and Persuade Voters by Appealing to Emotions.” American Journal of Political Science49:388–405.
10.
CrummyKaren. 2012. “Dems Ramp Up PAC Attack.” Denver Post, October21, 1A.
11.
FalkArminHeckmanJames J.2009. “Lab Experiments Are a Major Source of Knowledge in the Social Sciences.” Science326:535–38.
12.
FinkelSteven E.GeerJohn G.1998. “A Spot Check: Casting Doubt on the Demobilizing Effect of Attack Advertising.” American Journal of Political Science42:573–95.
13.
GerberAlan S.2004. “Does Campaign Spending Work? Field Experiments Provide Evidence and Suggest New Theory.” American Behavioral Scientist47:541–74.
14.
GerberAlan S.GimpelJames G.GreenDonald P.ShawDaron R.2011. “How Large and Long-Lasting Are the Persuasive Effects of Televised Campaign Ads? Results from a Randomized Field Experiment.” American Political Science Review105:135–50.
15.
GerberAlan S.HuberGregory A.DohertyDavidDowlingConor M.PanagopoulosCostas. 2013. “Big Five Personality Traits and Responses to Persuasive Appeals: Results from Voter Turnout Experiments.” Political Behavior35:687–728.
16.
GneezyUriListJohn A.2006. “Putting Behavioral Economics to Work: Testing for Gift Exchange in Labor Markets Using Field Experiments.” Econometrica74:1365–84.
17.
GoldenbergEdie N.TraugottMichael W.1980. “Congressional Campaign Effects on Candidate Recognition and Evaluation.” Political Behavior2:61–90.
18.
GoldsteinKenFreedmanPaul. 2002. “Campaign Advertising and Voter Turnout: New Evidence for a Stimulation Effect.” The Journal of Politics64:721–40.
19.
GreenDonald P.GerberAlan S.2008. Get Out the Vote: How to Increase Voter Turnout. Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution Press.
20.
HillSeth J.JamesLoLynnVavreckJohnZaller. 2013. “How Quickly We Forget: The Duration Of Persuasion Effects From Mass Communication.” Political Communication30 : 521-47.
21.
HillygusD. SunshineShieldsTodd G.2009. The Persuadable Voter: Wedge Issues in Presidential Campaigns. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
22.
HooverTim. 2012a. “Hudak Fights to Keep Swing-District Seat.” Denver Post, August2, 5A.
JeritJenniferBarabasJasonCliffordScott. 2013. “Comparing Contemporaneous Laboratory and Field Experiments on Media Effects.” Public Opinion Quarterly77:256–82.
25.
KahnemanDanieITverskyAmos. 1979. “Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under Risk.” Econometrica47:263–91.
26.
KeithBruce E.MaglebyDavid B.NelsonCandice J.OrrElizabethWestlyeMark C.WolfingerRaymond E.1992. The Myth of the Independent Voter. Berkeley: University of California Press.
27.
KinderDonald R.PalfreyThomas R.1993. Experimental Foundations of Political Science. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
28.
KrasnoJonathan S.GreenDonald P.2008. " Do Televised Presidential Ads Increase Voter Turnout? Evidence from a Natural Experiment."Journal of Politics70: 245-261.
29.
KrupnikovYanna. 2011. “When Does Negativity Demobilize? Tracing the Conditional Effect of Negative Campaigning on Voter Turnout.” American Journal of Political Science55:797–813.
30.
LauRichard R.PomperGerald M.2002. "Effectiveness of Negative Campaigning in U.S. Senate Elections."American Journal of Political Science46: 47-66.
31.
LauRichard R.SigelmanLeeRovnerIvy B.2007. “The Effects of Negative Political Campaigns: A Meta-analytic Reassessment.” The Journal of Politics69:1176–209.
32.
LoewenP. JohnRubensonDaniel. 2011. “For Want of a Nail: Negative Persuasion in a Party Leadership Race.” Party Politics17:45–65.
33.
McDermottRose. 2002. “Experimental Methodology in Political Science.” Political Analysis10:325–42.
34.
NivenDavid. 2006. “A Field Experiment on the Effects of Negative Campaign Mail on Voter Turnout in a Municipal Election.” Political Research Quarterly59:203–10.
35.
PanagopoulosCostasGreenDonald P.2008. “Field Experiments Testing the Impact of Radio Advertisements on Electoral Competition.” American Journal of Political Science52:156–68.
36.
RoeseNeal J.SandeGerald N.2006. “Backlash Effects in Attack Politics.” Journal of Applied Social Psychology23:632–53.
37.
SchultzCindyPancerS. Mark. 1997. “Character Attacks and Their Effects on Perceptions of Male and Female Political Candidates.” Political Psychology18:93–102.
38.
SkowronskiJohn J.CarlstonDonal E.1989. “Negativity and Extremity Biases in Impression Formation: A Review of Explanations.” Psychological Bulletin105:131–42.
39.
StevensDaniel. 2008. “Measuring Exposure to Political Advertising in Surveys.” Political Behavior30:47–72.
40.
StokesDonald E.MillerWarren E.1962. “Party Government and the Saliency of Congress.” Public Opinion Quarterly26:531–46.
41.
ValentinoNicholas A.TraugottMichael W.HutchingsVincent L.2002. “Group Cues and Ideological Constraint: A Replication of Political Advertising Effects Studies in the Lab and in the Field.” Political Communication19:29–48.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
