Patrick Kenney

Negative campaigning is a central component of political campaigns in the United States. Yet, until now, most evidence has suggested that negative campaigning has little effect on voters. How can we reconcile the findings of a plethora of empirical studies with the methods of political elites? This book cuts through to the central issue: how such advertising influences voters' attitudes and their actions during campaigns. Focusing on U.S. senatorial campaigns, Kim Fridkin and Patrick Kenney draw from surveys, experiments, facial expression emotion tests, content analyses, and focus groups. They develop the "tolerance and tactics theory of negativity" and demonstrate the divergent effects of tone and content on voter outcomes. Using their new framework, they find that harsh messages seen as relevant to the opponent's ability to govern are indeed likely to be noticed and acted upon.

Presidential debates are much more than just 90-minute events. They are followed by media analysis and interpretation, including interviews with experts, the discussion of instant polls, the replaying of highlights, and the commentary of candidates' spokespeople. It is a complicated mix to say the least. We seek to examine these competing influences for the final 2004 presidential debate with a unique and powerful design: a controlled experiment, a public opinion survey, and a content analysis of the debate and the news media's instant analysis immediately following the debate. Our findings, for example, suggest that citizens were influenced by the arguments presented directly by the candidates during the debate as well as by the media's instant analyzes of the candidates' debate performance. Because we are able to take a closer look at this complicated campaign event, we are able to tell a more compelling and nuanced story about the effects of debates than previously told.