Search results

We describe and test two process models of candidate evaluation. The memory-based model holds that evaluations are dependent on the mix of pro and con information retrieved from memory. The impression-driven model holds that evaluations are formed and updated "on-line" as information is encountered. The results provide evidence for the existence of stereotyping and projection biases that render the mix of evidence available in memory a nonveridical representation of the information to which subjects were exposed. People do not rely on the specific candidate information available in memory. Rather, consistent with the logic of the impression-driven processing model, an "on-line" judgment formed when the information was encountered best predicts candidate evaluation. The results raise both methodological and substantive challenges to how political scientists measure and model the candidate evaluation process.

Recent research has altered our understanding of how voters select a candidate in U.S. presidential elections. Scholars have demonstrated empirically that issues, candidate personalities, candidate evaluations, and party identification interact in a dynamic simultaneous fashion to determine vote choice. Other researchers have shown that prenomination candidate preferences play an integral role in structuring the general election vote. We join together these two important trends to introduce and test a revised model of vote choice, using 1980 NES panel data. The results reconfirm that candidate selection is part of a dynamic simultaneous process and reveal for the first time that prenomination preferences are woven tightly into this causal web.

A widely accepted generalization in the social science literature is that women tend to personalize politics & politicians. The meaning of this assertion, however, is not always clear, & varies from study to study. Available United States survey data from 1952 to 1976 are reviewed to determine whether & how women differ from men in their assessments of politicians. No evidence for a consistent sex difference in orientation to candidates versus issues is found. A wider range of categories is needed in analyzing grounds for voting for a candidate, & further research is needed to determine what differences there are between men & women in these categories. 2 Tables, Appendix. Modified HA.

The on-line and memory-based processing models of candidate evaluation can be better understood by incorporating the concepts of ambivalence and uncertainty, both as subjective feeling states and as objective properties of information. An experiment was designed to address three questions: What are the relationships between ambivalence and uncertainty? What are the informational foundations of subjective ambivalence and uncertainty, and to what extent are they rooted in on-line (time of exposure) and memory-based (time of judgment) processes? What are the consequences of ambivalence and uncertainty for candidate evaluation? The results suggest that (1) subjective uncertainty is more strongly rooted in information about the candidate than is subjective ambivalence; (2) subjective uncertainty and (to a lesser extent) ambivalence are associated with an increased propensity to engage in memory-based processing; and (3) subjective ambivalence and uncertainty result in more negative evaluations, particularly among less sophisticated people. These results suggest ways in which the on-line and memory-based models might productively be combined. 4 Tables, 79 References. (Original abstract - amended)