Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home

Schematic Assessments of Presidential Candidates

  • Arthur H. Miller (a1), Martin P. Wattenberg (a2) and Oksana Malanchuk (a3)

Abstract

This article applies theories of social cognition in an investigation of the dimensions of the assessments of candidates employed by voters in the United States. An empirical description of the public's cognitive representations of presidential candidates, derived from responses to open-ended questions in the American National Election Studies from 1952 to 1984, reveals that perceptions of candidates are generally focused on “personality” characteristics rather than on issue concerns or partisan group connections. Contrary to the implications of past research, higher education is found to be correlated with a greater likelihood of using personality categories rather than with making issue statements. While previous models have interpreted voting on the basis of candidate personality as indicative of superficial and idiosyncratic assessments, the data examined here indicate that they predominately reflect performance-relevant criteria such as competence, integrity, and reliability. In addition, both panel and aggregate time series data suggest that the categories that voters have used in the past influence how they will perceive future candidates, implying the application of schematic judgments. The reinterpretation presented here argues that these judgments reflect a rich cognitive representation of the candidates from which instrumental inferences are made.

Copyright

References

Hide All
Campbell, Angus, Converse, Philip E., Miller, Warren E., and Stokes, Donald E.. 1960. The American Voter. New York: Wiley.
Campbell, Angus, Gurin, Gerald, and Miller, Warren E.. 1954. The Voter Decides. Evanston, IL: Row and Peterson.
Cantor, Nancy, and Mischel, Walter. 1979. Prototypes in Person Perception. In Berkowitz, Leonard, ed., Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, vol. 12. New York: Academic Press.
Conover, Pamela J. 1981. Political Cues and the Perception of Candidates. American Politics Quarterly, 9:427–48.
Converse, Philip E. 1964. The Nature of Belief Systems in Mass Publics. In Apter, David, ed., Ideology and Discontent. New York: Free Press.
Downs, Anthony. 1957. An Economic Theory of Democracy. New York: Harper and Row.
Fiorina, Morris P. 1981. Retrospective Voting in American National Elections. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Fiske, Susan T. 1985. Schema-Based Versus Piecemeal Politics. In Political Cognition. See Lau and Sears, 1985.
Fiske, Susan T., and Linville, Patricia W.. 1980. What Does the Schema Concept Buy Us? Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 6: 543–57.
Fiske, Susan T., and Taylor, Shelley E.. 1984. Social Cognition. Menlo Park, CA: Addison-Wesley.
Foti, Roseanne, Fraser, Scott, and Lord, Robert. 1982. Effects of Leadership Labels and Prototypes on Perceptions of Political Leaders. Journal of Applied Psychology, 67:326–33.
Graber, Doris A. 1976. Press and T.V. as Opinion Resources in Presidential Campaigns. Public Opinion Quarterly, 40:285303.
Graber, Doris A. 1980. Mass Media and American Politics. Washington, D.C.: Congressional Quarterly Press.
Herstein, John A. 1981. Keeping the Voter's Limits in Mind: A Cognitive Process Analysis of Decision Making in Voting. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 40:843–61.
Kagay, Michael R., and Caldeira, Gregory A.. 1975. I Like the Looks of His Face: Elements of Electoral Choice, 1952–1972. Presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, San Francisco.
Kelley, Stanley, and Mirer, Thad. 1974. The Simple Act of Voting. American Political Science Review, 68:572–91.
Kiesler, Charles A., Collins, Barry E., and Miller, Norman. 1969. Attitude Change: A Critical Analysis of Theoretical Approaches. New York: Wiley.
Kinder, Donald R. 1985. Presidential Character Revisited. In Political Cognition. See Lau and Sears, 1985.
Kinder, Donald R., and Abelson, Robert P.. 1981. Appraising Presidential Candidates: Personality and Affect in the 1980 Campaign. Presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, New York.
Kinder, Donald R., Peters, Mark D., Abelson, Robert P., and Fiske, Susan T.. 1980. Presidential Prototypes. Political Behavior, 2:315–37.
Lau, Richard R. 1985. Political Schemas, Candidate Evaluations and Voting Behavior. In Political Cognition. See Lau and Sears, 1985.
Lau, Richard R., and Sears, David O., eds. 1985. Political Cognition. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Lippman, Walter. 1922. Public Opinion. New York: Harcourt and Brace.
Markus, Hazel. 1977. Self-Schemata and Processing Information About the Self. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 35:6378.
Markus, Gregory B., and Converse, Philip E.. 1979. A Dynamic Simultaneous Equation Model of Electoral Choice. American Political Science Review, 73:1055–70.
Miller, Arthur H., and MacKuen, Michael. 1979. Informing the Electorate: A National Study. In Kraus, Sidney, ed., The Great Debates: Carter vs. Ford 1976. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
Miller, Arthur H., and Miller, Warren E.. 1976. Ideology in the 1972 Election: Myth or Reality? American Political Science Review, 70:832–49.
Miller, Arthur H., and Wattenberg, Martin P.. 1981. Policy and Performance Voting in the 1980 Elections. Presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, New York.
Miller, Warren E., Miller, Arthur H., and Schneider, Edward J.. 1980. American National Election Studies Data Sourcebook, 1952–1978. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Nisbett, Richard E., and Ross, Lee. 1980. Human Inference: Strategies and Shortcomings in Social Judgments. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Page, Benjamin I. 1978. Choices and Echoes in Presidential Elections. Chicago: Chicago University Press.
Popkin, Samuel, Gorman, John W., Phillips, Charles, and Smith, Jeffrey A.. 1976. What Have You Done for Me Lately? Toward an Investment Theory of Voting. American Political Science Review, 70:779805.
Rabinowitz, George. 1978. On the Nature of Political Issues: Insights from a Spatial Analysis. American Journal of Political Science, 22: 793817.
Rosenstone, Steven J., Behr, Roy L., and Lazarus, Edward H.. 1984. Third Parties in America: Citizen Response to Major Party Failure. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Rusk, Jerrold G., and Weisberg, Herbert F.. 1972. Perceptions of Presidential Candidates: Implications for Electoral Change. Midwest Journal of Political Science, 16:388410.
Sears, David O. 1969. Political Behavior. In Lindzey, Gardner and Aronson, Elliot, eds., The Handbook of Social Psychology, 2d ed., vol. 5. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Schonemann, Peter H., and Carroll, Robert M.. 1970. Fitting One Matrix to Another Under Choice of a Similarity Transformation and a Rigid Motion. Psychometrika, 35:245–55.
Schneider, David J., Hastorf, Albert H., and Ellsworth, Phoebe C.. 1979. Person Perception, 2d ed. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Shabad, Goldie, and Andersen, Kristi. 1979. Candidate Evaluations by Men and Women. Public Opinion Quarterly, 43:1935.
Stokes, Donald E. 1966. Some Dynamic Elements of Contests for the Presidency. American Political Science Review, 60:1928.
Taylor, Shelley E., and Crocker, Jennifer. 1981. Schematic Bases of Social Information Processing. In Higgins, E. Tory, Herman, Charles A., and Zanna, Mark P., eds., Social Cognition. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Taylor, Shelley E., and Fiske, Susan T.. 1978. Salience Attention and Attribution: Top of the Head Phenomena. In Berkowitz, Leonard, ed., Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, vol. 11. New York: Academic Press.
Tesser, Abraham. 1978. Self-Generated Attitude Change. In Berkowitz, Leonard, ed., Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, vol. 11. New York: Academic Press.
Wattenberg, Martin P. 1984. The Decline of American Political Parties, 1952–1980. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Weisberg, Herbert F., and Rusk, Jerrold G.. 1970. Dimensions of Candidate Evaluations. American Political Science Review, 64:1167–85.
Zajonc, Robert B. 1980. Feeling and Thinking: Preferences Need No Inferences. American Psychologist, 39:151–75.

Schematic Assessments of Presidential Candidates

  • Arthur H. Miller (a1), Martin P. Wattenberg (a2) and Oksana Malanchuk (a3)

Metrics

Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed