Access

You are not currently logged in.

Access your personal account or get JSTOR access through your library or other institution:

login

Log in to your personal account or through your institution.

If You Use a Screen Reader

This content is available through Read Online (Free) program, which relies on page scans. Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.

Candidate Perception in an Ambiguous World: Campaigns, Cues, and Inference Processes

Pamela Johnston Conover and Stanley Feldman
American Journal of Political Science
Vol. 33, No. 4 (Nov., 1989), pp. 912-940
DOI: 10.2307/2111115
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2111115
Page Count: 29
  • Read Online (Free)
  • Subscribe ($19.50)
  • Cite this Item
Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.
Candidate Perception in an Ambiguous World: Campaigns, Cues, and Inference Processes
Preview not available

Abstract

Much theory and research shows that information about candidates' issue positions is often difficult for members of the public to obtain: candidates typically do not go out of their way to make their positions clear; the media devote little time to covering candidates' stands on the issues; and many voters have little interest or motivation to search out information about the candidates' positions. Despite this, by election day a substantial number of voters are willing to identify the issue positions of the candidates, and these perceived positions are often good predictors of vote choice. In this paper we consider the question of how voters perceive candidates' issue positions given limited information and high information costs. Our model posits that voters use previously acquired information to infer where candidates stand on the issues. In addition, characteristics of the candidates serve as cues that allow voters to make inferences from specific categories of people and politicians. Our analysis of panel data from the 1976 presidential election demonstrates the influence of these cues in the perception of the candidates and the role of the campaign in structuring the cues that voters use.

Page Thumbnails

  • Thumbnail: Page 
[912]
    [912]
  • Thumbnail: Page 
913
    913
  • Thumbnail: Page 
914
    914
  • Thumbnail: Page 
915
    915
  • Thumbnail: Page 
916
    916
  • Thumbnail: Page 
917
    917
  • Thumbnail: Page 
918
    918
  • Thumbnail: Page 
919
    919
  • Thumbnail: Page 
[920]
    [920]
  • Thumbnail: Page 
921
    921
  • Thumbnail: Page 
922
    922
  • Thumbnail: Page 
923
    923
  • Thumbnail: Page 
[924]
    [924]
  • Thumbnail: Page 
925
    925
  • Thumbnail: Page 
926
    926
  • Thumbnail: Page 
927
    927
  • Thumbnail: Page 
928
    928
  • Thumbnail: Page 
929
    929
  • Thumbnail: Page 
[930]
    [930]
  • Thumbnail: Page 
[931]
    [931]
  • Thumbnail: Page 
[932]
    [932]
  • Thumbnail: Page 
[933]
    [933]
  • Thumbnail: Page 
934
    934
  • Thumbnail: Page 
935
    935
  • Thumbnail: Page 
936
    936
  • Thumbnail: Page 
937
    937
  • Thumbnail: Page 
938
    938
  • Thumbnail: Page 
939
    939
  • Thumbnail: Page 
940
    940