Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home

An Impression-Driven Model of Candidate Evaluation

  • Milton Lodge (a1), Kathleen M. McGraw (a1) and Patrick Stroh (a1)

Abstract

We describe and test two process models of candidate evaluation. The memory-based model holds that evaluations are dependent on the mix of pro and con information retrieved from memory. The impression-driven model holds that evaluations are formed and updated “on-line” as information is encountered. The results provide evidence for the existence of stereotyping and projection biases that render the mix of evidence available in memory a nonveridical representation of the information to which subjects were exposed. People do not rely on the specific candidate information available in memory. Rather, consistent with the logic of the impression-driven processing model, an “on-line” judgment formed when the information was encountered best predicts candidate evaluation. The results raise both methodological and substantive challenges to how political scientists measure and model the candidate evaluation process.

Copyright

References

Hide All
Anderson, James C., and Gerbing, Donald W.. 1988. “Structural Equation Modeling in Practice: A Review and Recommended Two-Step Approach.” Psychological Bulletin 103:411–23.
Anderson, Norman H., and Hubert, S.. 1963. “Effects of Concomitant Verbal Recall on Order Effects in Personality Impression Formation.” Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 17:112.
Brody, Richard A., and Page, Benjamin I.. 1972. “The Assessment of Policy Voting.” American Political Science Review 66:450–58.
Campbell, Angus, Converse, Phillip E., Miller, Warren E., and Stokes, Donald E.. 1960. The American Voter. New York: Wiley.
Chaiken, Shelly, and Stangor, Charles. 1987. ”Attitudes and Attitude Change.” Annual Review of Psychology 38:575630.
Conover, Pamela J., and Feldman, Stanley. 1986. “The Role of Inference in the Perception of Political Candidates.” In Political Cognition: The Nineteenth Annual Carnegie Symposium on Cognition, ed. Lau, Richard and Sears, David O.. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Dreben, Elizabeth K., Fiske, Susan T., and Hastie, Reid. 1979. “The Independence of Item and Evaluative Information: Impression and Recall Order Effects in Behavior-based Impression Formation.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 37:1758–68.
Enelow, James M., and Hinich, Melvin J.. 1984. The Spatial Theory of Voting: An Introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Fiske, Susan T., and Taylor, Shelley E.. 1984. Social Cognition. New York: Random House.
Gant, Michael, and Davis, Dwight F.. 1984. ”Mental Economy and Voter Rationality: The Informed Citizen Problem in Voting Research.” Journal of Politics 46:132–53.
Granberg, Donald. 1985. ”An Anomaly in Political Perception.” Public Opinion Quarterly 49:504–16.
Hamilton, David L. 1981. Cognitive Processes in Stereotyping and Intergroup Behavior. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Hamill, Ruth, Lodge, Milton, and Blake, Frederick. 1985. “The Breadth, Depth, and Utility of Partisan, Class, and Ideological Schemas.” American Journal of Political Science 29:850–70.
Hastie, Reid, and Park, Bernadette. 1986. ”The Relationship between Memory and Judgment Depends on Whether the Task Is Memory-based or On-Line.” Psychological Review 93:258–68.
Herstein, John A. 1981. ”Keeping the Voter's Limits in Mind: A Cognitive Process Analysis of Decision-Making in Voting.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 40:843–61.
Kelley, Stanley. 1983. Interpreting Elections. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Kelley, Stanley, and Mirer, Thad. 1974. ”The Simple Act of Voting.” American Political Science Review 61:572–91.
Kinder, Donald R. 1986. “Presidential Character Revisited.” In Political Cognition: The Nineteenth Annual Carnegie Symposium on Cognition, ed. Lau, Richard R. and Sears, David O.. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Kinder, Donald R., and Abelson, Robert P.. 1981. “Appraising Presidential Candidates: Personality and Affect in the 1980 Campaign.” Presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, New York.
Krosnick, Jon A. 1988a. ”Psychological Perspectives on Political Candidate Perception: A Review of the Literature on the Projection Hypothesis.” Presented at the Midwest Political Science Association Meeting, Chicago.
Krosnick, Jon A. 1988b. ”The Role of Attitude Importance in Social Evaluations: A Study of Policy Preferences, Presidential Candidate Evaluations, and Voting Behavior.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 55:196210.
Lau, Richard R. 1986. ”Political Schemata, Candidate Evaluations, and Voting Behavior.” In Political Cognition: The Nineteenth Annual Carnegie Symposium on Cognition, ed. Lau, Richard R. and Sears, David O.. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Lazarsfeld, Paul F., Benelson, Bernard, and Gaudet, Hazel. 1944. The People's Choice: How the Voter Makes Up His Mind in A Presidential Campaign. New York: Duell, Sloan, and Pearce.
Lichtenstein, Meryl, and Srull, Thomas K.. 1987. “Processing Objectives As a Determinant of the Relationship between Recall and Judgment.” Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 23:93118.
Lippmann, Walter. 1922. Public Opinion. New York: Harcourt, Brace.
Lodge, Milton, and Hamill, Ruth. 1986. ”A Partisan Schema for Political Information Processing.” American Political Science Review 80:505–19.
McGraw, Kathleen, Lodge, Milton, and Stroh, Patrick. 1988. ”On-Line Processing in Candidate Evaluation: The Effects of Issue Order, Issue Shambaugh Conference on Communication, Cognition, and Political Judgments and Action, University of Iowa.
Markus, Gregory B. 1982. ”Political Attitudes during an Election Year: A Report on the 1980 NES Panel Study.” American Political Science Review 76:538–60.
Markus, Gregory B., and Converse, Phillip. 1979. ”A Dynamic Simultaneous Equation Model of Electoral Choice.” American Political Science Review 73:1055–70.
Miller, Arthur H., Wattenberg, Martin, and Malanchuk, Oksana. 1986. ”Schematic Assessment of Presidential Candidates.” American Political Science Review 80:521–40.
Murdock, Bennet B. Jr., 1982. ”Recognition Memory.” In Handbook of Research Methods in Human Memory and Cognition, ed. Richard, C.. Puff, . New York: Academic.
Newell, Allen, and Simon, Herbert. 1972. Human Problem Solving. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Simon, Herbert. 1981. The Sciences of the Artificial, 2d ed. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Simon, Herbert. 1985. ”Human Nature and Politics: The Dialogue of Psychology with Political Science.” American Political Science Review 79:293304.
Stokes, Donald E., and Miller, Warren E.. 1962. “Party Government and Saliency of Congress.” Public Opinion Quarterly 26:531–46.
Taylor, Shelley E., and Crocker, Jennifer. 1981. “Schematic Bases of Social Informataion Processing.” In Social Cognition: The Ontario Symposium, ed. Higgins, Edward Tory, Herman, C. Peter, and Zanna, Mark P.. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Wyer, Robert S., and Srull, Thomas K.. 1986. “Human Cognition in Its Social Context.” Psychological Review 93:322–59.

An Impression-Driven Model of Candidate Evaluation

  • Milton Lodge (a1), Kathleen M. McGraw (a1) and Patrick Stroh (a1)

Metrics

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed