Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-tj2md Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-18T12:17:40.569Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Replicating Experiments Using Aggregate and Survey Data: The Case of Negative Advertising and Turnout

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 August 2014

Stephen D. Ansolabehere ,
Shanto Iyengar  and
Adam Simon
Stephen D. Ansolabehere
Affiliation:
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Shanto Iyengar
Affiliation:
Stanford University
Adam Simon
Affiliation:
University of Washington
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Experiments show significant demobilizing and alienating effects of negative advertising. Although internally valid, experiments may have limited external validity. Aggregate and survey data offer two ways of providing external validation for experiments. We show that survey recall measures of advertising exposure suffer from problems of internal validity due to simultaneity and measurement error, which bias estimated effects of ad exposure. We provide valid estimates of the causal effects of ad exposure for the NES surveys using instrumental variables and find that negative advertising causes lower turnout in the NES data. We also provide a careful statistical analysis of aggregate turnout data from the 1992 Senate elections that Wattenberg and Brians (1999) recommend. These aggregate data confirm our original findings. Experiments, surveys, and aggregate data all point to the same conclusion: Negative advertising demobilizes voters.

Type
Forum
Information
American Political Science Review , Volume 93 , Issue 4 , December 1999 , pp. 901 - 909
Copyright
Copyright © American Political Science Association 1999

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Abadie, Alberto. 1998. “Semiparametric Estimation of Instrumental Variable Models for Causal Effects.” Department of Economics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Typescript.Google Scholar
Angrist, Joshua D., Imbens, Guido, and Rubin, Donald. 1996. “Identification of Causal Effects Using Instrumental Variables.” Journal of the American Statistical Association 91 (2): 444–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ansolabehere, Stephen, and Iyengar, Shanto. 1995a. Going Negative: How Political Advertising Shrinks and Polarizes the Electorate. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Ansolabehere, Stephen, and Iyengar, Shanto. 1995b. “Messages Forgotten: Misreporting in Surveys and the Bias Toward Minimal Effects.” Department of Political Science, Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Typescript.Google Scholar
Ansolabehere, Stephen, Iyengar, Shanto, Simon, Adam, and Valentino, Nicholas. 1994. “Does Attack Advertising Demobilize the Electorate?” American Political Science Review 88 (December): 829–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bartels, Larry. 1993. “Messages Received: The Political Impact of Media Exposure.” American Political Science Review 87 (June): 267–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bound, John, Jaeger, David A., and Baker, Regina M. 1995. “Problems with Instrumental Variables Estimation When the Correlation between the Instruments and the Endogenous Explanatory Variable Is Weak.” Journal of the American Statistical Association 90 (June): 443–50.Google Scholar
Bradburn, Norman, Rips, Lance J., and Shevell, Steven K. 1987. “Answering Autobiographical Questions: The Impact of Memory and Inference in Surveys.” Science 236 (April): 157–61.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Elections Data Services. 1993. The Election Data Book, 1992: A Statistical Portrait of Voting in America. Lanham, MD: Bernan.Google Scholar
Greene, William H. 1997. Econometric Analysis. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
Higgins, E. Tory, Kuiper, Nicholas A., and Olson, James M. 1981. “Social Cognition: A Need to Get Personal.” In Social Cognition, ed. Higgins, E. Tory, Herman, C. Peter, and Zanna, Mark P.Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Pp. 395–420.Google Scholar
Houston, D. A., Doan, K. A., and Roskos-Ewoldsen, D. R. 1999. “Negative Political Advertising and Choice Conflict.” Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied 5 (March): 3–16.Google Scholar
Houston, D. A., and Roskos-Ewoldsen, D. R. 1998. “Cancellation and Focus Model of Choice and Preferences for Political Candidates.” Basic and Applied Social Psychology 20 (December): 305–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Imbens, Guido, and Angrist, Joshua. 1994. “Identification and Estimation of Local Average Treatment Effects.” Econometrica 62 (March): 467–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Iyengar, Shanto. 1990. “Shortcuts to Political Knowledge: The Role of Selective Attention and Accessibility.” In Information and Democratic Processes, ed. Ferejohn, John and Kuklinski, James. Champaign: University of Illinois Press. Pp. 160–85.Google Scholar
Johnston, John. 1984. Econometric Methods. 3d ed. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Little, Roderick, and Rubin, Donald. 1986. Statistical Analysis with Missing Data. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Loftus, E. F., Klinger, M. R., Smith, K. D., and Fiedler, Judith. 1990. “A Tale of Two Questions.” Public Opinion Quarterly 54 (Fall): 330–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McFadden, Daniel, and Rudd, Paul A. 1994. “Estimation by Simulation.” Review of Economics and Statistics 76 (November): 591–608.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller, Warren E., Kinder, Donald, Rosenstone, Steven J., and the National Election Studies. 1993. American National Election Study, 1992: Pre- and Post-Election Survey [computer file] (Study #6067) Conducted by University of Michigan, Center for Political Studies. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan, Center for Political Studies/ Inter-University Consortium for Political and Social Research [producers]. Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-University Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor].Google Scholar
Pierce, John C., and Lovrich, Nicholas P. 1982. “Survey Measurement of Political Participation: Selective Effects of Recall in Petition Signing.” Social Science Quarterly 63 (1): 164–71.Google Scholar
Price, Vincent, and Zaller, John. 1993. “Who Gets the News?” Public Opinion Quarterly 57 (Summer): 133–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosenstone, Steven J., and Hansen, John Mark. 1993. Mobilization, Participation, and Democracy in America. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Rosenstone, Steven J., Kinder, Donald, Miller, Warren E., and the National Election Studies. 1997. American National Election Study, 1996: Pre- and Post-Election Survey [computer file] (Study #6896). Conducted by University of Michigan, Center for Political Studies. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan, Center for Political Studies/Inter-University Consortium for Political and Social Research [producers]. Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-University Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor].Google Scholar
Shaw, Daron. 1999. “The Effect of TV Ads and Candidate Appearances on Statewide Presidential Votes, 1988–96.” American Political Science Review 93 (June): 345–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Silver, Brian D., Anderson, Barbara A., and Abramson, Paul R. 1986. “Who Overreports Voting?” American Political Science Review 80 (June): 613–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Staiger, Douglas, and Stock, James H. 1997. “Instrumental Variables Regression with Weak Instruments.” Econometrica 65 (May): 557–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, Jiahui, and Zivot, Eric. 1998. “Inference on Structural Parameters in Instrumental Variables Regression with Weak Instruments.” Econometrica 66 (November): 1389–1404.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wattenberg, Martin P., and Brians, Craig Leonard, “Negative Campaign Advertising: Demobilzer or Mobilizer?” American Political Science Review 93 (December): 891–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar