Lynn Vavreck

The 2006 Cooperative Congressional Election Study

Abstract In 2006 Polimetrix, Inc. of Palo Alto, CA. fielded the Cooperative Congressional Election Study, the largest study of Congressional elections ever fielded in the US. The project was a joint venture of 38 universities and over 100 political scientists. In this paper, we detail the design and execution of the project, with special attention to the method by which the sample was generated. We show that the estimates from the Common Content of CCES outperform conventional estimates based on RDD phone surveys. We also argue that opt‐in panels, internet surveys, and cooperative ventures like CCES provide cost‐effective alternatives for social scientists under certain conditions. These types of surveys can provide reductions in RMSE over conventional methods when sample matching is used to ameliorate the biases that come with sampling from an opt‐in panel.

The Exaggerated Effects of Advertising on Turnout: The Dangers of Self-Reports

Political Scientists routinely rely on self-reports when investigating the effects of political stimuli on behavior. An example of this is found in the American politics work addressing whether campaign advertising mobilizes voters. Findings appear to vary by methodology and are based on varying degrees of self-reports; yet, little attention is paid to the furtive complications that arise when self-reports are used as both dependent and independent variables. In this paper, I demonstrate and attempt to account for the correlated yet unobservable errors that drive self-reports of advertising exposure and political behavior. The results are from a randomized survey experiment involving approximately 1500 respondents. Before the 2002 elections, I showed a professionally developed, non-partisan, get-out-the-vote advertisement to a random subset of a randomly drawn national sample via televisions in their own homes. The analysis shows a great divide between the true effect (using assigned treatment and validated vote) and results using respondent recall of these activities.

Campaign Advertising: Partisan Convergence or Divergence?

Prior research demonstrates that many citizens are unable to perceive differences between the two major political parties. In order to investigate whether candidate behavior in campaigns contributes to this perception, we test implications about partisan constraints on campaign rhetoric drawn from the literature on parties and policy convergence. Our results suggest that candidates of different parties do not highlight the same issues or positions in their campaign advertising. We find that campaign rhetoric is strongly motivated by party even when controlling for constituency characteristics and other factors. Thus, there is convergence among candidates of the same party across districts and states and divergence between opposing candidates within districts and states. Our results are based on a detailed content analysis of more than 1,000 campaign advertisements aired by 290 candidates in 153 elections in 37 states during the 1998 midterm elections.

Increasing Inequality: The Effect of GOTV Mobilization on the Composition of the Electorate

Numerous get-out-the-vote (GOTV) interventions are successful in raising voter turnout. However, these increases may not be evenly distributed across the electorate and could potentially increase the differences between voters and nonvoters. By analyzing individual level-data, we reassess previous GOTV experiments to determine which interventions mobilize under-represented citizens versus those who regularly turn out. We develop a generalized and exportable test which indicates whether a particular intervention reduces or exacerbates disparities in political participation and apply it to 24 previous experimental interventions. On average, current mobilization strategies significantly widen disparities in participation by mobilizing high-propensity individuals more than the under-represented, low-propensity citizens. The results hold troubling implications for the study and improvement of political inequality, but the methodological procedures laid out in this study may assist the development and testing o...

Primary Politics: Race, Gender, and Age in the 2008 Democratic Primary

Abstract Despite Barack Obama’s momentum in the early phase of the Democratic nomination, the process of selecting a nominee took longer than usual. Obama’s momentum, it seems, got stuck, and the 2008 Democratic presidential nomination was an unusually drawn out affair. Even when it appeared Barack Obama would win the nomination, many Clinton supporters said they would support John McCain in the general election. Why were some Democrats unwilling to join the Obama bandwagon once he emerged as a viable front‐runner – and ultimately the Democratic nominee? In this paper we bring a unique set of panel data from the 2008 Cooperative Campaign Analysis Project (CCAP) to bear on questions about primary vote choice, examining the evolution of preferences over the unusually long and intense 2008 Democratic presidential nomination campaign. Attitudes about race predict vote choice in partisan contests; here we show that (conditional on the presence of a black candidate) these attitudes help explain the dynamics of candidate support over the prolonged intra‐party contest for the 2008 Democratic presidential nomination.

Improving Media Measurement: Evidence From the Field

In light of a recent exchange between Prior (2013a) and Dilliplane, Goldman, and Mutz (2013), we evaluate the new American National Election Study program-count measures of news exposure using a unique dataset that tracks self-reports as well as actual exposure to news collected via passive tracking devices. We bring these data to bear on concerns raised by Prior (2013a) about the construct and convergent validity of the new ANES measures. Our results add nuance to previous findings showing respondents’ propensity to overreport exposure to news, and also demonstrate that on average, self-reported measures reflect relative levels of exposure quite well. Additionally, we show that the more unique news programs a person watches, the more total time he or she is exposed to political news. Very few people watch only one program but watch it repeatedly. The data also reveal an increase in the number of programs watched leading up to election day, and a concomitant increase in the amount of time per capita spent with political news as elections approach. We conclude, however, that the program-count measure is not without its weaknesses. Shortening the list of programs affects construct validity by introducing noise into the low end of the scale. Expanding the list of programs in the survey to include local news and special reports will improve fidelity at the low end of this new measure.

The Electoral Landscape of 2016

As 2015 got underway, most Americans were poised for another Bush vs. Clinton presidential election, but by the middle of the year it was clear something unexpected was unfolding in the race for the White House. In this article, we illuminate the political landscape heading into the 2016 election, paying special attention to the public’s mood, their assessments of government, their attitudes about race and members of the other party, and the health of the nation’s economy. Fundamental predictors of election outcomes did not clearly favor either side, but an increasing ethnic diversity in the electorate, alongside a racially polarized electorate, was favorable to Democrats. Ultimately, an ambivalent electorate divided by party and race set the stage for a presidential primary that played directly on these divisions, and for a general election whose outcome initially appeared far from certain.

Does Product Placement Change Television Viewers' Social Behavior?

To what extent are television viewers affected by the behaviors and decisions they see modeled by characters in television soap operas? Collaborating with scriptwriters for three prime-time nationally-broadcast Spanish-language telenovelas, we embedded scenes about topics such as drunk driving or saving money at randomly assigned periods during the broadcast season. Outcomes were measured unobtrusively by aggregate city- and nation-wide time series, such as the number of Hispanic motorists arrested daily for drunk driving or the number of accounts opened in banks located in Hispanic neighborhoods. Results indicate that while two of the treatment effects are statistically significant, none are substantively large or long-lasting. Actions that could be taken during the immediate viewing session, like online searching, and those that were relatively more integrated into the telenovela storyline, specifically reducing cholesterol, were briefly affected, but not behaviors requiring sustained efforts, like opening a bank account or registering to vote.

Negativity, Information, and Candidate Position-Taking

The purpose of this paper is to advance our understanding of how negativity affects voters’ assessments of the positions candidates take on issues. We argue that the inferences people make about candidates’ positions on issues differ depending on whether the information they encounter comes from attack or self-promotional statements. Specifically, we posit that attacks offer two pieces of information to voters—insight into the positions of the target and the sponsor—whereas, positive information only affects perceptions of the sponsor. Further, we contend that attacks offer important correctives to candidates’ often misleading self-promotional claims. By drawing attention to the differences between the informational content of negative and positive appeals, we offer new insights into the inferences voters make about candidates’ positions on issues. We support these claims using data from an internet-based experiment employing a nationally representative sample of nearly 4,000 people. The paper concludes by teasing out a series of implications that arise from these insights.

Want a Better Forecast? Measure the Campaign Not Just the Economy

Three years ago, a newly elected President Obama told America that if Congress approved his plan to borrow nearly a trillion dollars, he would hold unemployment below 8%. It hasn’t been below 8% since. This week he’s been trying to take a bow for 8.3% unemployment. Not so fast, Mr. President . . . if you take into account all the people who are struggling for work or who have just stopped looking, the real unemployment rate is over 15%. (Romney 2012)