Voter Mobilization
Do Negative Campaign Ads Mobilize or Demobilize voters?
The rise of negative campaign ads have had a dramatic effect on political
campaigns and have given rise to the debate of whether or not negative ads or attack
ads mobilize voters or do these ads demobilize the American electorate? Negative
campaign ads through the stimulation hypothesis have an invigorating effect on the
electorate and in fact mobilize voters (Martin). The study of Ansolabehere and Iyengar
in 1995 on campaign advertisement which attempted to prove that negative ads
demobilize voters is in fact flawed and can be disputed. There is no evidence in fact that
negative advertising depresses voter turnout, but in fact it increases voter turnout
through stimulation as a result of these negative ads (Martin). The analysis and
experiments of the below political scientists will show that in fact the argument put forth
by Iyengar and Ansolabehere is flawed and that in fact negative campaign ads stimulate
voters and create a greater voter turnout in elections (Wattenberg, and Brians 891-899).
Supporters of the demobilization hypothesis claim that negative ads undermine
political efficacy and make it less likely that citizens will vote (Martin). Ansolabehere and
Iyengar, supporters of the demobilization hypothesis, created a number of experiments
on a set of California elections as well as a study of the turnout in the 1992 senate
elections to examine the effect television commercials have and how negative
campaign commercials influence voter participation. In their belief, negative attack ads
demobilize the electorate and create a lower probability of voting amongst citizens
(Martin). This study as done by Ansolabehere and Iyengar did support the idea that
negative campaign ads provided information to citizens but it still decreased voter
turnout. The studies found that subjects who were shown a single negative
advertisement claimed
The rise of negative campaign ads have had a dramatic effect on political
campaigns and have given rise to the debate of whether or not negative ads or attack
ads mobilize voters or do these ads demobilize the American electorate? Negative
campaign ads through the stimulation hypothesis have an invigorating effect on the
electorate and in fact mobilize voters (Martin). The study of Ansolabehere and Iyengar
in 1995 on campaign advertisement which attempted to prove that negative ads
demobilize voters is in fact flawed and can be disputed. There is no evidence in fact that
negative advertising depresses voter turnout, but in fact it increases voter turnout
through stimulation as a result of these negative ads (Martin). The analysis and
experiments of the below political scientists will show that in fact the argument put forth
by Iyengar and Ansolabehere is flawed and that in fact negative campaign ads stimulate
voters and create a greater voter turnout in elections (Wattenberg, and Brians 891-899).
Supporters of the demobilization hypothesis claim that negative ads undermine
political efficacy and make it less likely that citizens will vote (Martin). Ansolabehere and
Iyengar, supporters of the demobilization hypothesis, created a number of experiments
on a set of California elections as well as a study of the turnout in the 1992 senate
elections to examine the effect television commercials have and how negative
campaign commercials influence voter participation. In their belief, negative attack ads
demobilize the electorate and create a lower probability of voting amongst citizens
(Martin). This study as done by Ansolabehere and Iyengar did support the idea that
negative campaign ads provided information to citizens but it still decreased voter
turnout. The studies found that subjects who were shown a single negative
advertisement claimed
Cited: Ansolabehere, S., & Iyengar, S. “Going Negative: How Attack Ads Shrink and polarize the Electorate.” New York: Free Press. Ansolabehere, S., & Iyengar, S., Simon, A., & Valentino, N. (1994). Does attack advertising demobilize the electorate? American Political Science Review, 88, 829-838. Finkel, Steven, and John Geer. "A Spot Check: Casting Doubt on the Demobilizing Effect of Attack Advertising." American Journal of Political Science. 42.2 (1998): 573-595. Web. 12 Apr. 2012. . Freedman, Paul, and Ken Goldstein. "Measuring Media Exposure and the Effects of Negative Campaign Ads." American Journal of Political Science. 43.4 (1999): 1189-1208. Web. 12 Apr. 2012. . Jackson, Robert, Jeffery Mondak, and Robert Huckfeldt. "Examining the Possible Corrosive Impact of Negative Advertising on Citizens ' Attitudes toward Politics." Political Research Quarterly. 62.1 (2009): 55-69. Web. 12 Apr. 2012. . Martin, Paul. "Inside the Black Box of Negative Campaign Effects: Three Reasons Why Negative Campaigns Mobilize." Political Psychology. 25.4 (2004): n. page. Web. 12 Apr. 2012. . Wattenberg, Martin, and Craig Brians. "Negative Campaign Advertising: Demobilizer or Mobilizer?." American Political Science Review . 93.4 (1999): 891-899. Web. 12 Apr. 2012. . ----------------------- 1 2