Does Complex or Simple Rhetoric Win Elections? An Integrative Complexity Analysis of U.S. Presidential Campaigns

Research suggests that the integrative complexity of political rhetoric tends to drop during election season, but little research to date directly addresses if this drop in complexity serves to increase or decrease electoral success. The two present studies help fill this gap. Study 1 demonstrates t...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Political psychology 2012-10, Vol.33 (5), p.599-618
Main Authors: Conway III, Lucian Gideon, Gornick, Laura Janelle, Burfeind, Chelsea, Mandella, Paul, Kuenzli, Andrea, Houck, Shannon C., Fullerton, Deven Theresa
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
attitudes
College Students
complexity
Election results
Elections
Electoral campaigning
Electoral College
Expectations
Laboratories
Negative campaigning
Nomination
Political campaigns
Political candidates
Political debate
Political Parties
Political psychology
Political rhetoric
Presidential Campaigns
Presidential debates
Presidential elections
Primary elections
Rhetoric
Social psychology
U.S.A
Voting
Voting behaviour
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Research suggests that the integrative complexity of political rhetoric tends to drop during election season, but little research to date directly addresses if this drop in complexity serves to increase or decrease electoral success. The two present studies help fill this gap. Study 1 demonstrates that, during the Democratic Party primary debates in 2003—2004, the eventual winners of the party nomination showed a steeper drop in integrative complexity as the election season progressed than nonwinning candidates. Study 2 presents laboratory evidence from the most recent presidential campaign demonstrating that, while the complexity of Obama's rhetoric had little impact on college students' subsequent intentions to vote for him, the complexity of McCain's rhetoric was significantly positively correlated with their likelihood of voting for him. Taken together, this research is inconsistent with an unqualified simple is effective view of the complexity-success relationship. Rather, it is more consistent with a compensatory view: Effective use of complexity (or simplicity) may compensate for perceived weaknesses. Thus, appropriately timed shifts in complexity levels, and/or violations of negative expectations relevant to complexity, may be an effective means of winning elections. Surprisingly, mere simplicity as such seems largely ineffective.
ISSN:0162-895X
1467-9221
DOI:10.1111/j.1467-9221.2012.00910.x