Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-5bf98f6d76-r9mtw Total loading time: 0.3 Render date: 2021-04-21T00:47:37.504Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "metricsAbstractViews": false, "figures": false, "newCiteModal": false, "newCitedByModal": true }

Examining a Most Likely Case for Strong Campaign Effects: Hitler’s Speeches and the Rise of the Nazi Party, 1927–1933

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 August 2018

PETER SELB
Affiliation:
University of Konstanz
SIMON MUNZERT
Affiliation:
Hertie School of Governance
Corresponding

Abstract

Hitler’s rise to power amidst an unprecedented propaganda campaign initiated scholarly interest in campaign effects. To the surprise of many, empirical studies often found minimal effects. The predominant focus of early work was on U.S. elections, though. Nazi propaganda as the archetypal and, in many ways, most likely case for strong effects has rarely been studied. We collect extensive data about Hitler’s speeches and gauge their impact on voter support at five national elections preceding the dictatorship. We use a semi-parametric difference-in-differences approach to estimate effects in the face of potential confounding due to the deliberate scheduling of events. Our findings suggest that Hitler’s speeches, while rationally targeted, had a negligible impact on the Nazis’ electoral fortunes. Only the 1932 presidential runoff, an election preceded by an extraordinarily short, intense, and one-sided campaign, yielded positive effects. This study questions the importance of charismatic leaders for the success of populist movements.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © American Political Science Association 2018 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below.

Footnotes

We are grateful to Johannes Häussler and Sascha Göbel for their superb research assistance; Fred Hockney for his proof-reading and language editing; Birgit Jacob and Hannah Laumann for their editing; Christian Spinner, who sounded out the terrain in his Bachelor’s thesis; Jürgen W. Falter, Jonas Meßner, Dieter Ohr, and Paul Thurner, who provided their data; the participants of the research colloquium of the Graduate School of Decision Sciences at the University of Konstanz; the panel on media and politics at the EPSA Conference 2016 in Brussels; Alexander De Juan, Thomas Gschwend, Moritz Marbach, and the reviewers for valuable comments; and the responsible editor for his enduring support during a long and controversial review process. Replication files are available at the American Political Science Review Dataverse: https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/3KOQWQ.

References

Abadie, Alberto. 2005. “Semiparametric Difference-in-Differences Estimators.” Review of Economic Studies 72 (1): 119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Abel, Theodore. 1965. The Nazi Movement. New York: Atherton Press.Google Scholar
Adena, Maja, Enikolopov, Ruben, Petrova, Maria, Santarosa, Veronica, and Zhuravskaya, Ekaterina. 2015. “Radio and the Rise of the Nazis in Prewar Germany.” The Quarterly Journal of Economics 130 (4): 1885–939.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Allen, William S. 1984. The Nazi Seizure of Power. The Experience of a Single German Town 1992-1945. New York: Penguin.Google Scholar
Almond, Gabriel Abraham, and Verba, Sidney. 1963. The Civic Culture: Political Attitudes and Democracy in Five Nations. Princeton: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Althaus, Scott L., Nardulli, Peter F., and Shaw, Daron R.. 2002. “Candidate Appearances in Presidential Elections, 1972–2000.” Political Communication 19 (1): 4972.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Angrist, Joshua D., Imbens, Guido W., and Rubin, Donald B.. 1996. “Identification of Causal Effects Using Instrumental Variables.” Journal of the American Statistical Association 91 (434): 444–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anheier, Helmut K. 2003. “Movement Development and Organizational Networks: The Role of ‘Single Members’ in the German Nazi Party, 1925–30.” In Social movements and Networks. Relational Approaches to Collective Action, eds. Diani, Mario and McAdam, Doug. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 4976.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anheier, Helmut K., Neidhardt, Friedhelm, and Vortkamp, Wolfgang. 1998. “Movement Cycles and the Nazi Party Activities of the Munich NSDAP, 1925–1930.” American Behavioral Scientist 41 (9): 1262–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bartels, Larry M. 1985. “Resource Allocation in a Presidential Campaign.” Journal of Politics 47 (3): 928–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bartels, Larry M. 1993. “Messages Received: The Political Impact of Media Exposure.” American Political Science Review 87 (2): 267–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bennett, W. Lance, and Iyengar, Shanto. 2008. “A New Era of Minimal Effects? The Changing Foundations of Political Communication.” Journal of Communication 58 (4): 707–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berelson, Bernard R., Lazarsfeld, Paul F., and McPhee, William N.. 1954. Voting: A Study of Opinion Formation in a Presidential Election. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Blackwell, Matthew. 2013. “A Framework for Dynamic Causal Inference in Political Science.” American Journal of Political Science 57 (2): 504–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brams, Steven J., and Davis, Morton D.. 1974. “The 3/2’s Rule in Presidential Campaigning.” American Political Science Review 68 (1): 113–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bruppacher, Paul. 2012. Adolf Hitler und die Geschichte der NSDAP. Teil 1: 1889 bis 1937. 3rd ed. Norderstedt: Books on Demand.Google Scholar
Brustein, William. 1998. The Logic of Evil. The Social Origins of the Nazi Party, 1925–1933. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Bytwerk, Randall L. 1981. “Fritz Reinhardt and the Rednerschule der NSDAP.” Quarterly Journal of Speech 67 (3): 298309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Caliendo, Marco, and Kopeinig, Sabine. 2008. “Some Practical Guidance for the Implementation of Propensity Score Matching.” Journal of Economic Surveys 22 (1): 3172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campbell, James E. 2008. The American Campaign. U.S. Presidential Campaigns and the National Vote (2nd ed.). College Station: Texas A&M University Press.Google Scholar
Campbell, Angus, Converse, Philip E., and Miller, Warren E.. 1960. The American Voter. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Childers, Thomas, and Weiss, Eugene. 1990. “Voters and Violence. Political Violence and the Limits of National Socialist Mass Mobilization.” German Studies Review 13 (3): 481–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ciolek-Kümper, Jutta. 1976. Wahlkampf in Lippe. München: Verlag Dokumentation.Google Scholar
Colantoni, Claude S., Levesque, Terrence J., and Ordeshook, Peter C.. 1975. “Campaign Resource Allocations Under the Electoral College.” American Political Science Review 69 (1): 141–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Collier, Rex Madison. 1944. “The Effect of Propaganda Upon Attitude Following a Critical Examination of the Propaganda Itself.” The Journal of Social Psychology 20 (1): 317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cox, Gary W. 1999. “Electoral Rules and the Calculus of Mobilization.” Legislative Studies Quarterly 24 (3): 387419.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Domarus, Max. 1973. Hitler. Reden und Proklamationen, 1932–1945. Wiesbaden: Löwit.Google Scholar
Eatwell, Roger. 2000. “The Rebirth of the ‘Extreme Right’ in Western Europe?Parliamentary Affairs 53 (3): 407–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Evans, Richard J. 2005. The Coming of the Third Reich. New York: Penguin.Google Scholar
Falter, Jürgen W. 1991. Hitlers Wähler. München: C.H. Beck.Google Scholar
Falter, Jürgen W., and Hänisch, Dirk. 1990. “Election and Social Data of the Districts and Municipalities of the German Empire from 1920 to 1933.” GESIS Data Archive, Cologne. ZA8013 Data file Version 1.0.0. URL: https://doi.org/10.4232/1.8013.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Falter, Jürgen W., and Kater, Michael H.. 1993. “Wähler und Mitglieder der NSDAP. Neue Forschungsergebnisse zur Soziographie des Nationalsozialismus 1925–1933.” Geschichte und Gesellschaft 19 (2): 155–77.Google Scholar
Faucheux, Ronald A. 2002. Running for Office. The Strategies, Techniques, and Messages Modern Political Candidates Need to Win Elections. Lanham: M. Evans.Google Scholar
Finkel, Steven E. 1993. “Reexamining the “Minimal Effects” Model in Recent Presidential Campaigns.” Journal of Politics 55 (1): 121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Flint, Colin. 2000. “Electoral Geography and the Social Construction of Space: The Example of the Nazi Party in Baden, 1924–1932.” GeoJournal 51 (3): 145–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Führer, Karl Christian. 2008. “Politische Kultur und Journalismus: Tageszeitungen als politische Akteure in der Krise der Weimarer Republik 1929–1933.” Jahrbuch für Kommunikationsgeschichte 10: 2651.Google Scholar
Gelman, Andrew, and King, Gary. 1993. “Why Are American Presidential Election Campaign Polls so Variable When Votes Are so Predictable?British Journal of Political Science 23 (4): 409–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gerber, Alan S., and Green, Donald P.. 2000. “The Effects of Canvassing, Telephone Calls, and Direct Mail on Voter Turnout. A Field Experiment.” American Political Science Review 94 (3): 653–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goebbels, Joseph. 1992. Tagebücher 1924–1945. München: Piper.Google Scholar
Goldstein, Kenneth M., and Holleque, Matthew. 2010. “Getting Up Off the Canvass. Rethinking the Study of Mobilization.” In The Oxford Handbook of American Elections and Political Behavior, ed. Leighley, Jan E.. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 577–94.Google Scholar
Google Inc. 2015. “Google Maps API.” URL: https://developers.google.com/maps/Google Scholar
Grofman, Bernard, and Selb, Peter. 2009. “A Fully General Index of Political Competition.” Electoral Studies 28 (2): 291–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hadamovsky, Eugen. 1933. Propaganda und nationale Macht. Die Organisation der öffentlichen Meinung für die Nationale Politik. Oldenburg: Gerhard Stalling.Google Scholar
Hänisch, Dirk. 1989. “Inhalt und Struktur der Datenbank ‘Wahl- und Sozialdaten der Kreise und Gemeinden des Deutschen Reiches von 1920 bis 1933’.” Historical Social Research 14 (1): 3967.Google Scholar
Heberle, Rudolf. 1978. Bestimmungsgründe für die Wahlerfolge der NSDAP in Schleswig-Holstein 1924 bis 1932. In Wählerbewegung in der deutschen Geschichte. Analysen und Berichte zu den Reichstagswahlen 1871–1931, eds. Büsch, Otto, Wölk, Monika and Wölk, Wolfgang, 261–97.Google Scholar
Heckman, J. J., Ichimura, H., and Todd, P. E.. 1997. “Matching as an Econometric Evaluation Estimator: Evidence from Evaluating a Job Training Programme.” The Review of Economic Studies 64 (4): 605–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Herr, Paul J. 2002. “The Impact of Campaign Appearances in the 1996 Election.” Journal of Politics 64 (3): 904–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hill, Jeffrey S., Rodriquez, Elaine, and Wooden, Amanda E.. 2010. “Stump Speeches and Road Trips. The Impact of State Campaign Appearances in Presidential Elections.” Political Science and Politics 43 (2): 243–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hillygus, D. Sunshine. 2010. “Campaign Effects on Vote Choice.” In Oxford Handbook on Elections and Political Behavior, eds. Leighly, Jan and Edwards III, George C.. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 326–45.Google Scholar
Hitler, Adolf. 1992. Hitler. Reden, Schriften, Anordnungen. Vom Weimarer Parteitag bis zur Reichstagswahl. Juli 1926–Mai 1928, Vol. 2.1. München: K.G. Saur.Google Scholar
Hitler, Adolf. 1994 a. Hitler. Reden, Schriften, Anordnungen. Von der Reichstagswahl bis zur Reichspräsidentenwahl. Oktober 1930–Mr̎z 1932, Vol. 4.1. München: K.G. Saur.Google Scholar
Hitler, Adolf. 1994 b. Hitler. Reden, Schriften, Anordnungen. Zwischen den Reichstagswahlen. Juli 1928–September 1930, Vol. 3.1. München: K.G. Saur.Google Scholar
Hitler, Adolf. 1994 c. Hitler. Reden, Schriften, Anordnungen. Zwischen den Reichstagswahlen. Juli 1928–September 1930, Vol. 3.2. München: K.G. Saur.Google Scholar
Hitler, Adolf. 1995. Hitler. Reden, Schriften, Anordnungen. Zwischen den Reichstagswahlen. Juli 1928–September 1930 Vol. 3.3. München: K.G. Saur.Google Scholar
Hitler, Adolf. 1996. Hitler. Reden, Schriften, Anordnungen.Von der Reichspräsidentenwahl bis zur Machtergreifung. April 1932–Januar 1933, Vol. 5.1. München: K.G. Saur.Google Scholar
Hitler, Adolf. 1997. Hitler. Reden, Schriften, Anordnungen. Von der Reichstagswahl bis zur Reichspräsidentenwahl. Oktober 1930–März 1932, Vol. 4.3. München: K.G. Saur.Google Scholar
Hitler, Adolf. 1998. Hitler. Reden, Schriften, Anordnungen. Von der Reichspräsidentenwahl bis zur Machtergreifung. April 1932–Januar 1933, Vol. 5.2. München: K.G. Saur.Google Scholar
Holbrook, Thomas M. 2002. “Did the Whistle-Stop Campaign Matter?Political Science and Politics 35 (1): 5966.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holland, Paul W. 1986. “Statistics and Causal Inference.” Journal of the American Statistical Association 81 (396): 945–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huber, Gregory A., and Arceneaux, Kevin. 2007. “Identifying the Persuasive Effects of Presidential Advertising.” American Journal of Political Science 51 (4): 957–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Imbens, Guido W. 2000. “The Role of the Propensity Score in Estimating Dose-Response Functions.” Biometrika 87 (3): 706–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Iyengar, Shanto, and Kinder, Donald R.. 1987. News that Matters. Television and American Opinion. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Iyengar, Shanto, and Simon, Adam F.. 2000. “New Perspectives and Evidence on Political Communication and Campaign Effects.” Annual Review of Psychology 51: 149–69.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Janssen, Karl-Heinz. 1985. “Kümmerliche Notizen. Rauschnings ‘Gespräche mit Hitler’: Wie ein Schweizer Lehrer nach 45 Jahren einen Schwindel auffliegen ließ.” URL: http://www.zeit.de/1985/30/kuemmerliche-notizen, retrieval July 13, 2018.Google Scholar
Johnston, Richard, Blais, André, Brady, Henry E., and Crête, Jean. 1992. Letting the People Decide. The Dynamics of Canadian Elections. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Jones, Jeffrey M. 1998. “Does Bringing out the Candidate Bring Out the Votes? The Effects of Nominee Campaigning in Presidential Elections.” American Politics Quarterly 26 (4): 395419.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kater, Michael H. 1980. “Methodologische Überlegungen über Möglichkeiten und Grenzen einer Analyse der sozialen Zusammensetzung der NSDAP von 1925–1945.” In Die Nationalsozialisten. Analysen faschistischer Bewegung, ed. Mann, Reinhard. Stuttgart: Klett-Cotta, 155–85.Google Scholar
Katz, Elihu, and Lazarsfeld, Paul. 1955. Personal Influence: The Part Played by People in the Flow of Mass Communications. New York: The Free Press.Google Scholar
Kelley, Stanley. 1961. “The Presidential Campaign.” In The Presidential Election and Transition, 1960–1961: Brookings Lectures and Additional Papers, ed. David, Paul T.. Washington D.C.: Brookings Institution, 5787.Google Scholar
Kershaw, Ian. 2014. How Effective Was Nazi Propaganda? In Nazi Propaganda. The Power and Limitations, ed. Welch, David. London: Routledge, 180205.Google Scholar
King, David C., and Morehouse, David. 2004. “Moving Voters in the 2000 Presidential Campaign. Local Visits, Local Media.” In Lights, Camera, Campaign! Media, Politics and Political Advertising, ed. Schultz, David A.. New York: Peter Lang, 301–18.Google Scholar
King, Gary, Rosen, Ori, Tanner, Martin, and Wagner, Alexander F.. 2008. “Ordinary Economic Voting Behavior in the Extraordinary Election of Adolf Hitler.” Journal of Economic History 68 (4): 951–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kitschelt, Herbert, and McGann, Anthony J.. 1997. The Radical Right in Western Europe: A Comparative Analysis. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
Klapper, Joseph T. 1960. The Effects of Mass Communication. Glencoe, Ill.: The Free Press.Google Scholar
Layton, Roland V. 1970. “The Völkischer Beobachter, 1920–1930: The Nazi Party Newspaper in the Weimar Era.” Central European History 3 (4): 353–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lazarsfeld, Paul F., Berelson, Bernard, and Gaudet, Hazel. 1948. The People’s Choice. How the Voter Makes up his Mind in a Presidential Campaign. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Mény, Yves, and Surel, Yves. 2002. The Constitutive Ambiguity of Populism. London: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Myerson, Roger B. 2004. “Political Economics and the Weimar Disaster.” Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics 160 (2): 187209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oakes, J. Michael. 2004. “The (mis-)estimation of Neighborhood Effects: Causal Inference for a Practicable Social Epidemiology.” Social Science & Medicine 58 (10): 1929–52.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ohr, Dieter. 1997. Nationalsozialistische Propaganda und Weimarer Wahlen. Empirische Analysen zur Wirkung von NSDAP-Versammlungen. Wiesbaden: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
O’Loughlin, John, Flint, Colin, and Anselin, Luc. 1994. “The Geography of the Nazi Vote. Context, Confession, and Class in the Reichstag Election of 1930.” Annals of the Association of American Geographers 84 (3): 351–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
O’Loughlin, John, and Shin, Michael. 1995. “Regions and Milieux in Weimar Germany. The Nazi Party Vote of 1930 in Geographic Perspective.” Erdkunde 49 (4): 305–14.Google Scholar
Paul, Gerhard. 1990. Aufstand der Bilder. Die NS-Propaganda vor 1933. Bonn: J.H.W. Dietz Nachf.Google Scholar
Plöckinger, Othmar. 1999. Reden um die Macht? Wirkung und Strategie der Reden Adolf Hitlers im Wahlkampf zu den Reichstagswahlen am 6. November 1932. Wien: Passagen.Google Scholar
Popkin, Samuel L. 1991. The Reasoning Voter: Communication and Persuasion in Presidential Campaigns. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Pridham, Geoffrey. 1973. Hitler’s Rise to Power: The Nazi Movement in Bavaria, 1923–1933. London: Hart-Davis, MacGibbon.Google Scholar
Pyta, Wolfram. 2007. Hindenburg. München: Siedler.Google Scholar
Rauschning, Hermann. 1939. Hitler Speaks. A Series of Political Conversations with Adolf Hitler on His Real Aims. London: Thornton Butterworth.Google Scholar
Reuband, Karl-Heinz. 2006. “Das NS-Regime zwischen Akzeptanz und Ablehnung. Eine retrospektive Analyse von Bevölkerungseinstellungen im Dritten Reich auf der Basis von Umfragedaten (The Nazi Regime between Acceptance and Refusal. A Retrospective Analysis of Popular Opinion in the Third Reich, Based on Survey Data).” Geschichte und Gesellschaft, 315–43.Google Scholar
Ridgeway, Greg, Kovalchik, Stephanie A., Griffin, Beth A., and Kabeto, Mohammed U.. 2015. “Propensity Score Analysis with Survey Weighted Data.” Journal of Causal Inference 3 (2): 237–49.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Robins, James M., Hernán, Miguel Angel, and Brumback, Babette. 2000. “Marginal Structural Models and Causal Inference in Epidemiology.” Epidemiology 11 (5): 550–60.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rösch, Mathias. 2002. Die Münchner NSDAP 1925-1933: Eine Untersuchung zur inneren Struktur der NSDAP in der Weimarer Republik. München: Oldenbourg.Google Scholar
Rosenstone, Steven J., and Hansen, John Mark. 1993. Mobilization, Participation, and Democracy in America. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Rubin, Donald B. 1980. “Randomization Analysis of Experimental Data. The Fisher Randomization Test: Comment.” Journal of the American Statistical Association 75 (371): 591–3.Google Scholar
Schanbacher, Eberhard. 1982. Parlamentarische Wahlen und Wahlsystem in der Weimarer Republik. Wahlgesetzgebung und Wahlreform im Reich und in den Ländern. Düsseldorf: Droste.Google Scholar
Schneider-Haase, D. Torsten. 1991. “Beschreibung der Stichprobenziehung zu den Mitgliedern der NSDAP vom 27. März - 7. September 1989 im Berlin Document Center.” Historical Social Research 16 (3): 113–51.Google Scholar
Sellers, Patrick J., and Denton, Laura M.. 2006. “Presidential Visits and Midterm Senate Elections.” Presidential Studies Quarterly 36 (3): 410–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shaw, Daron R., and Gimpel, James G.. 2012. “What If We Randomize the Governor’s Schedule? Evidence on Campaign Appearance Effects from a Texas Field Experiment.” Political Communication 29 (2): 137–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shively, W. Phillips. 1972. “Party Identification, Party Choice, and Voting Stability: the Weimar Case.” American Political Science Review 66 (4): 1203–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shugart, Matthew S., and Carey, John M.. 1992. Presidents and Assemblies. Constitutional Design and Electoral Dynamics. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stachura, Peter D. 1980. “The Political Strategy of the Nazi Party, 1919–1933.” German Studies Review 3 (2): 261–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thurner, Paul W., Klima, André, and Küchenhoff, Helmut. 2015. “Agricultural Structure and the Rise of the Nazi Party Reconsidered.” Political Geography 44: 5063.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van der Brug, Wouter, and Mughan, Anthony. 2007. “Charisma, Leader Effects and Support for Right-Wing Populist Parties.” Party Politics 13 (1): 2951.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vavreck, Lynn, Spiliotes, Constantine J., and Fowler, Linda L.. 2002. “The Effects of Retail Politics in the New Hampshire Primary.” American Journal of Political Science 46 (3): 595610.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Voigtländer, Nico, and Voth, Hans-Joachim. 2014. “Highway to Hitler.” NBER Working Paper No. 20150.Google Scholar
Voigtländer, Nico, and Voth, Hans-Joachim. 2015. “Nazi Indoctrination and Anti-Semitic Beliefs in Germany.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 112 (26): 7931–6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wakefield, Jonathan. 2004. “A Critique of Statistical Aspects of Ecological Studies in Spatial Epidemiology.” Environmental and Ecological Statistics 11 (1): 3154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Watt, James H., Mazza, Mary, and Snyder, Leslie. 1993. “Agenda-Setting Effects of Television News Coverage and the Effects Decay Curve.” Communication Research 20 (3): 408–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wernette, Dee R. 1974. “Political Violence and German Elections: 1930 and July, 1932.” Dissertation, University of Michigan.Google Scholar
Willner, Ann Ruth. 1985. The Spellbinders: Charismatic Political Leadership. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Zaller, John. 1992. The Nature and Origins of Mass Opinion. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Selb and Munzert Dataset

Link

Selb and Munzert supplementary material

Appendix

PDF 8 MB

Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Full text views reflects PDF downloads, PDFs sent to Google Drive, Dropbox and Kindle and HTML full text views.

Total number of HTML views: 980
Total number of PDF views: 3429 *
View data table for this chart

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between 07th August 2018 - 21st April 2021. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Send article to Kindle

To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Examining a Most Likely Case for Strong Campaign Effects: Hitler’s Speeches and the Rise of the Nazi Party, 1927–1933
Available formats
×

Send article to Dropbox

To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

Examining a Most Likely Case for Strong Campaign Effects: Hitler’s Speeches and the Rise of the Nazi Party, 1927–1933
Available formats
×

Send article to Google Drive

To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

Examining a Most Likely Case for Strong Campaign Effects: Hitler’s Speeches and the Rise of the Nazi Party, 1927–1933
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response


Your details


Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *