Candidate Perception in an Ambiguous World: Campaigns, Cues, and Inference Processes

Abstract

Much theory and research shows that information about candidates' issue positions is often difficult for members of the public to obtain: candidates typically do not go out of their way to make their positions clear; the media devote little time to covering candidates' stands on the issues; and many voters have little interest or motivation to search out information about the candidates' positions. Despite this, by election day a substantial number of voters are willing to identify the issue positions of the candidates, and these perceived positions are often good predictors of vote choice. In this paper we consider the question of how voters perceive candidates' issue positions given limited information and high information costs. Our model posits that voters use previously acquired information to infer where candidates stand on the issues. In addition, characteristics of the candidates serve as cues that allow voters to make inferences from specific categories of people and politicians. Our analysis of panel data from the 1976 presidential election demonstrates the influence of these cues in the perception of the candidates and the role of the campaign in structuring the cues that voters use.