Ballot photographs as cues in low-information elections

Political Psychology

Volumn 29, Issue 6, 2008, Pages 903-917

  Banducci, Susan A ^a   Karp, Jeffrey A ^a,c   Thrasher, Michael ^b   Rallings, Colin ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF EXETER   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF PLYMOUTH   (United Kingdom)

^c Amory Building ^*  (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Ballot photographs; Candidate appearance; First impressions; Heuristics; Low information elections

Indexed keywords

EID: 54849415478     PISSN: 0162895X     EISSN: 14679221     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9221.2008.00672.x     Document Type: Article

References (45)

1. Banducci, S., Thrasher, M., Rallings, R. Karp, J. (2003). Candidate appearance cues in low-information elections. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association. Philadelphia, PA.
2. Barrett, A. W. Barrington, L. W. (2005) Is a picture worth a thousand words: Newspaper photographs and voter evaluations of political candidates. The Harvard International Journal of Press/Politics, 10, 98 113.
3. Bartels, L. M. (1996). Uninformed votes: Information effects in presidential elections. American Journal of Political Science, 40, 194 231.
4. Brown, S., Lambert, R., Kay, B. Curtis, J. (1988). In the eye of the beholder: Leader images in Canada. Canadian Journal of Political Science, 21, 729 755.
5. Chaiken, S. Trope, Y. (Eds. 1999). Dual process theories in social psychology. New York : Guilford.
6. Fazio, R. H. Towles-Schwen, T. (1999). The MODE model of attitude-behavior processes. In S. Chaiken Y. Trope (Eds. Dual process theories in social psychology (pp. 97 116). New York : Guilford.
7. Funk, C. (1997). Implications of political expertise in candidate trait evaluations. Political Research Quarterly, 50, 675 697.
8. Gladwell, M. (2005). Blink: The power of thinking without thinking. New York : Little, Brown and Company.
9. Hamermesh, D. S. Biddle, J. E. (1994). Beauty and the labor-market. American Economic Review, 84, 1174 1194.
10. Haxby, J. V., Hoffman, E. A. Gobbini, M. I. (2000). The distributed human neural system for face perception. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 4, 223 233.
11. Hellweg, S. (1979). An examination of voter conceptualizations of the ideal political candidate. Southern Speech Communication Journal, 44, 373 385.
12. Huddy, L. Terkildsen, N. (1993a). Gender stereotypes and the perception of male and female candidates. American Journal of Political Science, 37, 119 147.
13. Huddy. L. Terkildsen, N. (1993b). The consequences of gender stereotypes for women candidates at different levels and types of office. Political Research Quarterly, 46, 503 525.
14. Jones, C. E. Clemons, M. L. (1993). A model of racial crossover voting: An assessment of the Wilder victory. In G. Persons (Ed. Dilemmas of black politics: Issues of leadership and strategy (pp. 128 146). New York : Harper Collins.
15. Kinder, D., Peters, M., Abelson, R. Fisk, S. (1980). Presidential prototypes. Political Behavior, 2, 315 337.
16. Krebs, T. B. (1998). The determinants of candidates' vote share and the advantages of incumbency in city council elections. American Journal of Political Science, 42, 921 935.
17. Lau, R. Redlawsk, D. P. (1997). Voting correctly. American Political Science Review, 91, 585 598.
18. Lau, R. Redlawsk, D. P. (2001). Advantages and disadvantages of cognitive heuristics in political decision-making. American Journal of Political Science, 45, 951 971.
19. Leeper, M. S. (1991). The impact of prejudice on female candidates: An experimental look at voter inference. American Politics Quarterly, 19, 248 261.
20. Lublin, D. Voss, S. D. (2000). Racial redistricting and realignment in southern state legislatures. American Journal of Political Science, 44, 792 810.
21. MacKinnon, D. P., Fairchild, A. J. Fritz, M. S. (2007). Mediation analysis. Annual Review of Psychology, 58, 593 614.
22. McDermott, M. (1997). Voting cues in low-information elections: Candidate gender as a social information variable in contemporary United States elections. American Journal of Political Science, 41, 270 283.
23. McDermott, M. (1998). Race and gender cues in low-information elections. Political Research Quarterly, 51, 895 918.
24. Miller, A., Wattenberg, M. Malanchuck, O. (1986). Schematic assessments of presidential candidates. American Political Science Review, 80, 521 540.
25. Niemi, R. G. Herrnson, P. S. (2003). Beyond the butterfly: The complexity of U.S. ballots. Perspectives on Politics, 1, 317 326.
26. Popkin, S. L. (1991). The reasoning voter: Communication and persuasion in presidential campaigns. Chicago : University of Chicago Press.
27. Rallings, C. Thrasher, M. (2002). NDC elections: A study in community engagement. Report published by the Neighbourhood Renewal Unit of the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, October.
28. Rallings, C., Thrasher, M., Cheal, B. Borisyuk, G. (2004). The new deal for communities: Assessing procedures and voter turnout at partnership board elections. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 22, 569 582.
29. Reeves, K. (1997). Voting hopes or fears? White voters, black candidates and racial politics in America. New York : Oxford University Press.
30. Riggle, E. D., Ottati, V. C., Wyer, R. S., Kuklinski, J. Schwarz, N. (1992). Basis of political judgements: The role of stereotypic and nonstereotypic information. Political Behavior, 14 (1 67 87.
31. Riggle, E. D. B., Miller, P. M., Shields, T. G. Johnson, M. M. S. (1997). Gender stereotypes and decision context in the evaluation of political candidates. Women & Politics, 17, 69 88.
32. Rosenberg, S. W., Bohan, L., McCafferty, P. Harris, K. (1986). The image and the vote: The effect of candidate presentation on voter preference. American Journal of Political Science, 30, 108 127.
33. Rosenberg, S. W., Kahn, S. Tran, T. (1991). Creating a political image: Shaping appearance and manipulating the vote. Political Behavior, 13, 345 367.
34. Rosenwasser, S. Dean, N. (1989). Gender role and political office: Effects of perceived masculinity/femininity of candidate and political office. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 13, 77 85.
35. Schaffner, B. F., Streb, M. J. Wright, G. C. (2007). A new look at the Republican advantage in nonpartisan elections. Political Research Quarterly, 60, 240 249.
36. Schubert, J. N. Curran, M. A. (2001). Stereotyping effects in candidate evaluation: The interaction of gender and attractiveness bias. Paper prepared for presentation at the 2001 annual meeting of the Midwestern Political Science Association.
37. Sigel, R. (1966). Image of the American presidency - Part II of an exploration into popular views of presidential power. Midwest Journal of Political Science, 10, 123 137.
38. Sigelman, L., Sigelman, C. K. Fowler, C. (1987). A bird of a different feather? An experimental investigation of physical attractiveness and the electability of female candidates. Social Psychology Quarterly, 50, 32 43.
39. Sigelman, C., Sigelman, L., Walkosz, B. Nitz, M. (1995). Black candidates, white voters: Understanding racial bias in political perceptions. American Journal of Political Science, 39, 243 265.
40. Smith, E. R. A. N. Fox, R. (2001). The electoral fortunes of women candidates for Congress. Political Research Quarterly, 54, 205 221.
41. Terkildsen, N. (1993). When white voters evaluate black candidates: The processing implications of candidate skin color, prejudice, and self monitoring. American Journal of Political Science, 37, 1032 1053.
42. Todorov, A., Mandisodza, A. N., Goren, A. Hall, C. C. (2005). Inferences of competence from faces predict election outcomes. Science, 308, 1623 1626.
43. Trent, J., Mongeau, P., Trent, J., Kendall, K. Cushing, R. (1993). The ideal candidate: A study of the desired attributes of the public and the media across two presidential campaigns. American Behavioral Scientist, 37, 225 239.
44. Wayne, S. (1982). Expectations of the president. In D. Graber (Ed. The president and the public (pp. 17 38). Philadelphia : Institute for the Study of Human Issues.
45. Willis, J. Todorov, A. (2006). First impressions: Making up your mind after a 100-Ms exposure to a face. Psychological Science, 17, 592 598.