Negative campaigning refers to a candidate’s or party’s campaign strategy that attacks an opponent on the basis of his or her past political record, with particular focus on the opponent’s character flaws, in contrast to simply highlighting the candidate’s or party’s attributes, promises, and ideological platform. Negative campaigning is widespread in American political campaigns and has become prevalent in the U.K. and continental European elections as well. Negative campaigning was heightened in the United States during the 1988 presidential elections, when Republican George H. W. Bush ran against the then-governor of Massachusetts, Democrat Michael Dukakis.
Usually, negative campaigning takes the form of a series of thirty-second ads during the election campaign period. Political parties and candidates who utilize these tactics do so because they believe that negative campaigning is the best strategy for gaining the upper hand in a campaign, by forcing the opponent to be on the defensive. Thus far, however, the research on negative campaigning has been rather inconclusive. It is still not clear whether negative campaign attempts exert any influence on election outcomes, while the literature on whether attack ads shrink or mobilize the electorate provides a rather mixed view as well. The research on turnout and negative campaigning is discussed below.
In their pioneering work, Ansolabehere and Iyengar (1995) employed controlled experiments, and their results suggest that negative campaigning demobilizes nonpartisan electorates. Though the authors acknowledge that negative campaigning enhances political information for voters, they argue that the decline in political efficacy and civic engagement turns off people, resulting in higher levels of abstention. These results apply primarily to nonpartisan voters. Thus, elections that are particularly plagued by negative campaigns tend to be decided by voters with a strong sense of party identification, not swing voters. These conclusions, however, have been challenged by Wattenberg and Brians (1999). Using data from public opinion surveys, they report that negative campaigning increases participation. Wattenberg and Brians further argue that negative advertisements are a source of political learning and will not demobilize the electorate in the process. As they see it, negative campaigns encourage voters to learn about the candidates and enhance the saliency of the election, which in turn tends to increase voter turnout.
The studies cited above suggest that the relationship between negative advertisements and turnout is not straightforward. The relationship is likely mediated by the specific content of the negative campaign ads. In their investigation of U.S. Senate campaigns, Kahn and Kenney (1999) found that voters have the ability to distinguish between appropriate and harsh negative advertisements. For example, the effect on participation is different when a party or candidate criticizes the opponent’s policy proposals than when the party or candidate simply disparages the opponent’s character and personal life. Another plausible expectation is that a curvilinear relationship exists: A small dosage of negative advertising may enhance political sophistication, but excessive amounts disengage citizens. If this curvilinear relationship exists, negative campaigning might have implications for political participation and representation.
Bibliography:
- Ansolabehere, S., and S. Iyengar. Going Negative: How Political Advertisements Shrink and Polarize the Electorate. New York: Free Press, 1995.
- Ansolabehere, S., S. Iyengar, A. Simon, and N.Valentino. “Does Attack Advertising Demobilize the Electorate?” American Political Science Review 88, no. 4 (1994): 829–836.
- Freedman P., and K. Goldstein. “Measuring Media Exposure and the Effect of Negative Campaign Ads.” American Journal of Political Science 43, no. 4 (1999): 1189–1208.
- Goldstein K., and P. Freedman. “Campaign Advertising and Voter Turnout: New Evidence for a Stimulation Effect.” Journal of Politics 64 (2002): 721–740.
- Kahn K. F., and P. Kenney. “Do Negative Campaigns Mobilize or Suppress Turnout? Clarifying the Relationship Between Negativity and Participation.” American Political Science Review 93, no. 4 (1999): 877–889.
- Lau, R. “Two Explanations for Negativity Effects in Political Behavior.” American Journal of Political Science 29, no. 1 (1985): 119–138.
- Lau, R., and G. Pomper. “Effects of Negative Campaigning on Turnout in U.S. Senate Elections, 1988–1998.” The Journal of Politics 63 (2001): 804–819.
- Lau, R., L. Sigelman, C. Heldman, and P. Babbitt. “The Effects of Negative Political Advertisements: A Meta-Analytic Assessment.” American Political Science Review, 93, 4 (1999): 851–875.
- Sigelman, Kugler. “Why is Research on the Effects of Negative Campaigning So Inconclusive?” Journal of Politics 65 (2003): 142–160.
- Wattenberg, M., and C. L. Brians. “Negative Campaign Advertising: Demobilizer or Mobilizer?” American Political Science Review 93, no. 4 (1999): 891–899.
This example Negative Campaigning Essay is published for educational and informational purposes only. If you need a custom essay or research paper on this topic please use our writing services. EssayEmpire.com offers reliable custom essay writing services that can help you to receive high grades and impress your professors with the quality of each essay or research paper you hand in.
See also:
- How to Write a Political Science Essay
- Political Science Essay Topics
- Political Science Essay Examples