The Minnesota Multi-Investigator 2012 Presidential Election Panel Study

In an analysis of the 2012 presidential election, we sought to optimize two key desiderata in capturing campaign effects: establishing causality and measuring dynamic (i.e., intraindividual) change over time. We first report the results of three survey‐experiments embedded within a three‐wave survey...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Analyses of social issues and public policy 2014-12, Vol.14 (1), p.78-104
Main Authors: Chen, Philip G., Appleby, Jacob, Borgida, Eugene, Callaghan, Timothy H., Ekstrom, Pierce, Farhart, Christina E., Housholder, Elizabeth, Kim, Hannah, Ksiazkiewicz, Aleksander, Lavine, Howard, Luttig, Matthew D., Mohanty, Ruchika, Rosenthal, Aaron, Sheagley, Geoff, Smith, Brianna A., Vitriol, Joseph A., Williams, Allison
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Attitudes
Bias
Candidates
Choices
Economic Development
Election results
Elections
Electoral College
Information Sources
Minnesota
Motivation
Obama, Barack
Political Parties
Political science
Presidential elections
Presidents
Racism
Referendum
Respondents
Surveys
Voter behavior
Whites
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:In an analysis of the 2012 presidential election, we sought to optimize two key desiderata in capturing campaign effects: establishing causality and measuring dynamic (i.e., intraindividual) change over time. We first report the results of three survey‐experiments embedded within a three‐wave survey panel design. Each experiment was focused on a substantive area of electoral concern. Our results suggest, among other findings, that retrospective evaluations exerted a stronger influence on vote choice in the referendum (vs. the choice) frame; that among White respondents, racial animosity strongly predicted economic evaluations for knowledgeable Republicans who were led to believe that positive economic developments were the result of actions taken by the Obama administration; and that information‐seeking bias is a contingent phenomenon, one depending jointly on the opportunity and motivation to selectively tune in to congenial information. Lastly, we demonstrate how the panel design also allowed us to (1) examine the reliability and stability of a variety of election‐related implicit attitudes, and to assess their impact on candidate evaluation; and (2) determine the causal impact of perceptions of candidates’ traits and respondents’ policy preferences on electoral preferences, and vice versa, an area of research long plagued by concerns about endogeneity.
ISSN:1529-7489
1530-2415
DOI:10.1111/asap.12041