Skip to main content
×
Home

Politicians Appear More Competent When Using Numerical Rhetoric

  • Rasmus T. Pedersen (a1)
Abstract
Abstract

Politically relevant numbers often have very limited effects on the policy attitudes of ordinary citizens, which make the widespread use of numbers by politicians somewhat puzzling. This paper argues that politicians’ numerical rhetoric may function as a voter heuristic and that the use of numbers by politicians therefore has a positive impact on voters’ perceptions of these politicians. A survey experiment confirms that even when numbers do little to move voters’ policy positions, numbers do have the effect of making politicians appear more competent. As a consequence, numerical rhetoric can in some cases increase electoral support for a politician.

  • View HTML
    • Send article to Kindle

      To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

      Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

      Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

      Politicians Appear More Competent When Using Numerical Rhetoric
      Available formats
      ×
      Send article to Dropbox

      To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Dropbox account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

      Politicians Appear More Competent When Using Numerical Rhetoric
      Available formats
      ×
      Send article to Google Drive

      To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Google Drive account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

      Politicians Appear More Competent When Using Numerical Rhetoric
      Available formats
      ×
Copyright
References
Hide All
Bartels Larry M. 1996. “Uninformed Votes: Information Effects in Presidential Elections.” American Journal of Political Science 40 (1): 194230.
Bartels Larry M. 2002. “The Impact of Candidate Traits in American Presidential Elections.” In Leaders' Personalities and the Outcomes of Democratic Elections, ed. King A.. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Berggren Niclas, Jordahl Henrik, and Poutvaara Panu. 2010. “The Looks of a Winner: Beauty and Electoral Success.” Journal of Public Economics 94 (1–2): 815. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2009.11.002
Campbell Rosie and Cowley Philip. 2014. “What Voters Want: Reactions to Candidate Characteristics in a Survey Experiment.” Political Studies 62 (4): 745–65. doi: 10.1111/1467-9248.12048
Campbell Rosie and Cowley Philip. 2015. “Attitudes to Moonlighting Politicians: Evidence from the United Kingdom.” Journal of Experimental Political Science, FirstView 110. doi: 10.1017/XPS.2014.21
Chong Dennis and Druckman James N.. 2007. “Framing Public Opinion in Competitive Democracies.” American Political Science Review 101 (4): 637–55.
Cohen Geoffrey L. 2003. “Party Over Policy: The Dominating Impact of Group Influence on Political Beliefs.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 85 (5): 808–22. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.85.5.808
Cuddy Amy J.C., Fiske Susan T., and Glick Peter. 2008. “Warmth and Competence as Universal Dimensions of Social Perception: The Stereotype Content Model and the BIAS Map.” In Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, ed. Mark P. Z.. (Vol. 40, pp. 61149). Academic Press.
Desrosiéres Alain. 1998. The Politics of Large Numbers – A History of Statistical Reasoning. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Druckman James N., Peterson Erik, and Slothuus Rune. 2013. “How Elite Partisan Polarization Affects Public Opinion Formation.” American Political Science Review 107 (1): 5779.
Fiske Susan T., Cuddy Amy J.C., and Glick Peter. 2007. “Universal Dimensions of Social Cognition: Warmth and Competence.” Trends in Cognitive Sciences 11 (2): 7783. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2006.11.005
Fiske Susan T., Cuddy Amy J.C., Glick Peter, and Xu Jun. 2002. “A Model of (Often Mixed) Stereotype Content: Competence and Warmth Respectively Follow from Perceived Status and Competition.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 82 (6): 878.
Fridkin Kim L. and Kenney Patrick J.. 2011. “The Role of Candidate Traits in Campaigns.” The Journal of Politics 73 (01): 6173. doi:10.1017/S0022381610000861
Funk Carolyn L. 1996. “The Impact of Scandal on Candidate Evaluations: An Experimental Test of the Role of Candidate Traits.” Political Behavior 18 (1): 124. doi: 10.2307/586509
Funk Carolyn L. 1997. “Implications of Political Expertise in Candidate Trait Evaluations.” Political Research Quarterly 50 (3): 675–97. doi: 10.2307/448922
Funk Carolyn L. 1999. “Bringing the Candidate into Models of Candidate Evaluation.” The Journal of Politics 61 (3): 700–20. doi: 10.2307/2647824
Gaines Brian J., Kuklinski James H., Quirk Paul J., Peyton Buddy, and Verkuilen Jay. 2007. “Same Facts, Different Interpretations: Partisan Motivation and Opinion on Iraq.” Journal of Politics 69 (4): 957–74. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2508.2007.00601.x
Gilens Martin. 2001. “Political Ignorance and Collective Policy Preferences.” American Political Science Review 95 (2): 379–96.
Goffin Richard D. and Olson James M.. 2011. “Is It All Relative?: Comparative Judgments and the Possible Improvement of Self-Ratings and Ratings of Others.” Perspectives on Psychological Science 6 (1): 4860. doi: 10.1177/1745691610393521
Gonzales Marti Hope, Kovera Margaret Bull, Sullivan John L., and Chanley Virginia. 1995. “Private Reactions to Public Transgressions: Predictors of Evaluative Responses to Allegations of Political Misconduct.” Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 21 (2): 136–48. doi: 10.1177/0146167295212004
Goren Paul. 2002. “Character Weakness, Partisan Bias, and Presidential Evaluation.” American Journal of Political Science 46 (3): 627–41. doi: 10.2307/3088404
Hayes Danny. 2010. “Trait Voting in U.S. Senate Elections.” American Politics Research 38 (6): 1102–29. doi: 10.1177/1532673x10371298
Herda Daniel. 2010. “How Many Immigrants?: Foreign-Born Population Innumeracy in Europe.” Public Opinion Quarterly 74 (4): 674–95. doi: 10.1093/poq/nfq013
Imai Kosuke, Keele Luke, and Tingley Dustin. 2010a. “A General Approach to Causal Mediation Analysis.” Psychological Methods 15 (4): 309–34. doi: 10.1037/a0020761
Imai Kosuke, Keele Luke, Tingley Dustin, and Yamamoto Teppei. 2010b. “Causal Mediation Analysis using R.” Advances in Social Science Research using R 196, 129–54. doi: 10.1007/978-1-4419-1764-5_8
Imai Kosuke, Keele Luke, Tingley Dustin, and Yamamoto Teppei. 2011. “Unpacking the Black Box of Causality: Learning About Causal Mechanisms from Experimental and Observational Studies.” American Political Science Review 105 (04): 765–89. doi:10.1017/S0003055411000414
Imai Kosuke, Keele Luke, Tingley Dustin, and Yamamoto Teppei. 2014. “Comment on Pearl: Practical Implications of Theoretical Results for Causal Mediation Analysis.” Psychological Methods 19 (4): 482–7.
Imai Kosuke and Yamamoto Teppei. 2013. “Identification and Sensitivity Analysis for Multiple Causal Mechanisms: Revisiting Evidence from Framing Experiments.” Political Analysis 21 (2): 141171. doi:10.1093/pan/mps040
Judd Charles M., James-Hawkins Laurie, Yzerbyt Vincent, and Kashima Yoshihisa. 2005. “Fundamental Dimensions of Social Judgment: Understanding the Relations between Judgments of Competence and Warmth.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 89 (6): 899913. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.89.6.899
Keele Luke. 2015. “Causal Mediation Analysis: Warning! Assumptions Ahead.” American Journal of Evaluation. doi: 10.1177/1098214015594689
Kervyn Nicolas, Yzerbyt Vincent, and Judd Charles M.. 2010. “Compensation between Warmth and Competence: Antecedents and Consequences of a Negative Relation between the Two Fundamental Dimensions of Social Perception.” European Review of Social Psychology 21 (1): 155187. doi: 10.1080/13546805.2010.517997
Kinder Donald R., Peters Mark. D., Abelson Robert P., and Fiske Susan T.. 1980. “Presidential Prototypes.” Political Behavior 2 (4): 315–37. doi: 10.2307/586418
Koch Thomas and Obermaier Magdalena. 2014. “With Heart and (No) Mind? How Recipients Negatively Infer Missing Information About Politicians and How This Affects the Assessment of the Speaker.” Communication Research. doi: 10.1177/0093650214565005
Kuklinski James H., Quirk Paul J., Jerit Jennifer, Schwieder David, and Rich Robert F.. 2000. “Misinformation and the Currency of Democratic Citizenship.” Journal of Politics 62 (3): 790816. doi: 10.1111/0022-3816.00033
Lau Richard R. and Redlawsk David P.. 2001. “Advantages and Disadvantages of Cognitive Heuristics in Political Decision Making.” American Journal of Political Science 45 (4): 951–71.
Lau Richard R. and Redlawsk David P.. 2006. “How Voters Decide.” New York: Cambridge University Press.
Lawrence Eric D. and Sides John. 2014. “The Consequences of Political Innumeracy.” Research & Politics 1 (2). doi: 10.1177/2053168014545414
Miller Arthur H., Wattenberg Martin P., and Malanchuk Oksana. 1986. “Schematic Assessments of Presidential Candidates.” American Political Science Review 80 (02): 521540. doi: 10.2307/1958272
Montgomery Jacob M., Nyhan Brendan, and Torres Michelle. 2016. “How Conditioning on Post-treatment Variables can Ruin Your Experiment and What to do About it.” Presented at Annual meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association, Chicago, IL, April 2016.
Nadeau Richard, Niemi Richard G., and Levine Jeffrey. 1993. “Innumeracy About Minority Populations.” Public Opinion Quarterly 57 (3): 332–47. doi: 10.1086/269379
Ohr Dieter and Oscarsson Henrik. 2013. “Leader Traits, Leader Image and Vote Choice. In Political Leaders and Democratic Elections, eds. Arts K., Blais A., & Schmitt H.. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Pedersen Rasmus T. 2016. “Ratio Bias and Policy Preferences: How Equivalency Framing of Numbers Can Affect Attitudes.” Political Psychology. doi: 10.1111/pops.12362
Popkin Samuel L. 1991. The Reasoning Voter: Communication and Persuasion in Presidential Elections. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Porter Theodore M. 1986. The Rise of Statistical Thinking 1820–1900. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Prévost Jean-Guy and Beaud Jean-Pierre. 2012. Statistics, Public Debate and the State, 1800–1945. London: Pickering & Chatto.
Schneider Monica C. and Bos Angela L.. 2014. “Measuring Stereotypes of Female Politicians.” Political Psychology 35 (2): 245266. doi: 10.1111/pops.12040
Schueler Beth E. and West Martin R.. 2016. “Sticker Shock: How Information Affects Citizen Support for Public School Funding.” Public Opinion Quarterly 80 (1): 90113.
Sigelman Lee and Niemi Richard G.. 2001. “Innumeracy about Minority Populations.” Public Opinion Quarterly 65 (1): 8694.
Sniderman Paul M. and Theriault Sean M.. 2004. The Structure of Political Argument and the Logic of Issue Framing. In Studies in Public Opinion: Attitudes, Nonattitudes, Measurement Error, and Change, eds. Saris Willem E. and Sniderman Paul M.. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Tingley Dustin, Yamamoto Teppei, Hirose Kentaro, Keele Luke, and Imai Kosuke. 2014. “Mediation: R Package for Causal Mediation Analysis.” Journal of Statistical Software 59 (5): 138. doi: 10.18637/jss.v059.i05
Utych Stephen M. and Kam Cindy D.. 2014. Viability, Information Seeking, and Vote Choice.” The Journal of Politics 76 (01): 152166. doi:10.1017/S0022381613001126
Wong Cara J. 2007. ““Little” and “Big” Pictures in Our Heads: Race, Local Context, and Innumeracy About Racial Groups in the United States.” Public Opinion Quarterly 71 (3): 392412. doi: 10.1093/poq/nfm023
Zhang Ying Charles and Schwarz Norbert. 2013. “The Power of Precise Numbers: A Conversational Logic Analysis.” Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 49 (5): 944946. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2013.04.002
Recommend this journal

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

Journal of Experimental Political Science
  • ISSN: 2052-2630
  • EISSN: 2052-2649
  • URL: /core/journals/journal-of-experimental-political-science
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×

Keywords:

Metrics

Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 54
Total number of PDF views: 225 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 1286 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between 11th September 2017 - 18th November 2017. This data will be updated every 24 hours.