Skip to main content
×
Home
    • Aa
    • Aa

Campaign Perceptions of Electoral Closeness: Uncertainty, Fear and Over-Confidence

Abstract

In partnership with state Democratic parties and the Obama campaign, the authors surveyed staffers from nearly 200 electoral campaigns in 2012, asking about the expected vote share in their races. Political operatives’ perceptions of closeness can affect how they campaign and represent citizens, but their perceptions may be wildly inaccurate: campaigns may irrationally fear close contests or be unrealistically optimistic. Findings indicate that political operatives are more optimistic than fearful, and that incumbent and higher-office campaigns are more accurate at assessing their chances. While the public may be better served by politicians fearing defeat, campaigns are typically staffed by workers who are over-confident, which may limit the purported benefits of electoral competition.

Copyright
Footnotes
Hide All
*

Department of Government, Harvard University (email: renos@gov.harvard.edu); Department of Political Science, Yale University (email: eitan.hersh@yale.edu). The authors thank Michael Young for his outstanding research assistance, and Yale’s Institution for Social and Policy Studies and Center for the Study of American Politics for research support. They also thank Jim St. George and Matt Gillette at NGP-VAN; Ethan Roeder and Ben Fuller at Obama for America; and Ann Fishman at the Association of State Democratic Party Chairs; and Drew Linzer for sharing his data on presidential polls. They are grateful to John Bullock, Daniel Butler, David Broockman, and Danny Hayes for helpful comments. Data replication sets are available at http://dataverse.harvard.edu/dataverse/BJPolS. Online appendices are available at http://dx.doi.org/doi: 10.1017/S0007123415000435.

Footnotes
References
Hide All
AldrichJohn H. 1993. Rational Choice and Turnout. American Journal of Political Science 37 (1):246278.
AnsolabehereStephen, BradyDavid, and FiorinaMorris. 1992. The Vanishing Marginals and Electoral Responsiveness. British Journal of Political Science 92 (1):2138.
AnsolabehereStephen, and SnyderJames M.Jr 2002. The Incumbency Advantage in U.S. Elections: An Analysis of State and Federal Offices, 1942–2000. Election Law Journal 1 (3):315338.
AtkinsonMatthew A., EnosRyan D., and HillSeth J.. 2009. Candidate Faces and Election Outcomes: Is the Face–Vote Correlation Caused by Candidate Selection? Quarterly Journal of Political Science 4:229249.
BawnKathleen et al. 2012. A Theory of Political Parties: Groups, Policy Demands and Nominations in American Politics. Perspectives on Politics 10 (3):571597.
BrownClifford E. 1982. A False Consensus Bias in 1980 Presidential Preferences. Journal of Social Psychology 118 (1):137138.
BrunellThomas. 2008. Redistricting and Representation: Why Competitive Elections are Bad for America. New York: Routledge.
BrunellThomas L., and BuchlerJustin. 2009. Ideological Representation and Competitive Congressional Elections. Electoral Studies 28:448457.
BuchlerJustin. 2005. Competition, Representation, and Redistricting. Journal of Theoretical Politics 17 (4):431463.
ButlerDaniel M., and NickersonDavid W.. 2011. Can Learning Constituency Opinion Affect How Legislators Vote? Results from a Field Experiment. Quarterly Journal of Political Science 6 (1):5583.
Canes-WroneBrandice, and ShottsKenneth W.. 2007. When Do Elections Encourage Ideological Rigidity? American Political Science Review 101 (2):273288.
DownsAnthony. 1957. An Economic Theory of Democracy. New York: Harper.
DuffyJohn, and TavitsMargit. 2008. Beliefs and Voting Decisions: A Test of the Pivotal Voter Model. American Journal of Political Science 52 (3):603618.
EnosRyan D., and FowlerAnthony. 2014. Pivotality and Turnout: Evidence from a Field Experiment in the Aftermath of a Tied Election. Political Science Research and Methods 2 (2):309319.
EnosRyan D., and HershEitan D.. 2015. Party Activists as Campaign Advertisers: The Ground Campaign as a Principal–Agent Problem. American Political Science Review 109 (2):252278.
EriksonRobert S., and PalfreyThomas R.. 2000. Equilibria in Campaign Spending Games: Theory and Data. American Political Science Review 94 (3):595609.
FennoRichard F. 1977. U.S. House Members in Their Constituencies: An Exploration. American Political Science Review 71 (3):883917.
FerejohnJohn A., and NollRoger G.. 1978. Uncertainty and the Formal Theory of Political Campaigns. American Political Science Review 72 (2):492505.
FiorinaMorris P. 1977. The Case of the Vanishing Marginals: The Bureaucracy Did It. American Political Science Review 71 (1):177181.
FragaBernard, and HershEitan. 2010. Voting Costs and Voter Turnout in Competitive Elections. Quarterly Journal of Political Science 5 (4):339356.
GalassoVincenzo, and NanniciniTommaso. 2011. Competing on Good Politicians. American Political Science Review 105 (1):7999.
GeerJohn G. 1996. From Tea Leaves to Opinion Polls: A Theory of Democratic Leadership. New York: Columbia University Press.
GeysBenny. 2006. Explaining Voter Turnout: A Review of Aggregate-Level Research. Electoral Studies 25 (4):637663.
GimpelJames G., KaufmannKaren M., and Pearson-MerkowitzShanna. 2007. Battleground States versus Blackout States: The Behavioral Implications of Modern Presidential Campaigns. Journal of Politics 69 (3):786797.
GranbergDonald, and BrentEdward. 1983. When Prophecy Bends: The Preference–Expectation Link in US Presidential Elections, 1952–1980. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 45 (3):477491.
HeaneyMichael T., MasketSeth E., MillerJoanne M., and StrolovitchDara Z.. 2012. Polarized Networks: The Organizational Affiliations of National Party Convention Delegates. American Behavioral Scientist 56 (12):16541676.
HershEitan D. 2015. Hacking the Electorate: How Campaigns Perceive Voters. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
JenningsM. Kent. 1992. Ideological Thinking among Mass Publics and Political Elites. Public Opinion Quarterly 56 (4):419441.
KahnemanDaniel, and TverskyAmos. 1979. Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk. Econometrica 47 (2):263292.
LernerJennifer S., and KeltnerDacher. 2001. Fear, Anger, and Risk. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 81 (1):140159.
MannThomas E. 1978. Unsafe at Any Margin. Washington, D.C.: American Enterprise Institute.
MayhewDavid. 1974. Congressional Elections: The Case of the Vanishing Marginals. Polity 6 (3):295317.
MilerKristina, C. 2009. The Limitations of Heuristics for Political Elites. Political Psychology 30 (6):863894.
MillerWarren E., and StokesDonald E.. 1963. Constituency Influence in Congress. American Political Science Review 57 (1):4556.
MoeTerry. 1989. The Politics of Bureaucratic Structure. Pp. 267329, in Can the Government Govern? edited by John Chubb and Paul Peterson. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution Press.
PersilyNathaniel. 2002. In Defense of Foxes Guarding Henhouses: The Case for Judicial Acquiescence to Incumbent-Protecting Gerrymanders. Harvard Law Review 116 (2):649683.
ReynaValerie F., NelsonWendy L., HanPaul K., and DieckmannNathan F.. 2009. How Numeracy Influences Risk Comprehension and Medical Decision Making. Psychological Bulletin 135 (6):943973.
RossLee, GreeneDavid, and HousePamela. 1977. The ‘False Consensus Effect’: An Egocentric Bias in Social Perception and Attribution Processes. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 13 (3):279301.
ShepsleKenneth A. 1972. The Strategy of Ambiguity: Uncertainty and Electoral Competition. American Political Science Review 66 (2):558568.
SidesJohn, and VavreckLynn. 2013. The Gamble: Choice and Chance in the 2012 Presidential Election. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.
StokesSusan C. 1999. Political Parties and Democracy. Annual Review of Political Science 2:243267.
StoneWalter J., and RapoportRonald B.. 1994. Candidate Perception among Nomination Activists: A New Look at the Moderation Hypothesis. Journal of Politics 56 (4):10341052.
ZallerJohn R. 1992. The Nature and Origin of Mass Opinion. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

British Journal of Political Science
  • ISSN: 0007-1234
  • EISSN: 1469-2112
  • URL: /core/journals/british-journal-of-political-science
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×
Type Description Title
PDF
Supplementary Materials

Enos and Hersh supplementary material
Appendix

 PDF (227 KB)
227 KB

Metrics

Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 52
Total number of PDF views: 205 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 715 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between September 2016 - 22nd October 2017. This data will be updated every 24 hours.