Most research on issue ownership examines the topic as an independent variable that may shape campaign strategy or voter behavior. In contrast, our study looks at ownership as a dependent variable. Specifically, we employ a national Internet survey of registered U.S. voters to gauge the extent to which such judgments are influenced by individual‐level factors other than partisan identity. We find that while partisanship shapes ownership beliefs to a considerable degree, policy preferences and performance evaluations have significant effects across a range of valence and position issues. While feelings of ambivalence toward the in‐ or out‐party do not have a consistent effect on ownership beliefs, higher out‐party ambivalence reduces the probability that citizens will identify their own party as owning most issues. It is therefore premature, and probably incorrect, to assume that perceived ownership is little more than an expression of a person's partisan attachment or intended vote.
Related Articles
Bernick, Ethan M., and Nathan Myers. 2012. “Issue Salience, Party Strength, and the Adoption of Health‐Care Expansion Efforts.” Politics & Policy 40 (1): 131‐159. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-1346.2011.00340.x
Grossmann, Matt. 2014. “The Varied Effects of Policy Cues on Partisan Opinions.” Politics & Policy 42 (6): 881‐904. https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12102
Kim, Eun Kyung. 2019. “Issue Ownership and Strategic Policy Choice in Multiparty Africa.” Politics & Policy 47 (5): 956‐983. https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12327
Related Media
Brenan, Megan. 2019. “Democrats Maintain Favorability Edge over Republicans.” September 30. https://news.gallup.com/poll/267122/democrats-maintain-favorability-edge-republicans.aspx
Hook, Janet. 2018. “Tax Overhaul Remains Unpopular, Poll Shows.” April 16. https://www.wsj.com/articles/tax-overhaul-remains-unpopular-poll-shows-1523912555
Pew Research Center. 2015. “GOP’s Favorability Rating Takes a Negative Turn.” July 23. https://www.people-press.org/2015/07/23/gops-favorability-rating-takes-a-negative-turn/
American politics today is driven largely by deep divisions between Democrats and Republicans. That said, there are many people who view the opposition in an overwhelmingly negative light – but who simultaneously possess a mix of positive and negative feelings toward their own party. This paper is a response to prior research (e.g., Lavine, Johnson, and Steenbergen 2012) indicating that such ambivalence increases the probability that voters will engage in "deliberative" (or "effortful") rather than "heuristic" thinking when responding to the choices presented to them in political campaigns. We extend the logic of this argument to a hypothetical race for Congress, using data from a survey experiment to determine whether a high degree of ambivalence toward one's party makes voters more responsive to a negative attack against the candidate of that party. In fact, we find little evidence that partisan ambivalence promotes a deliberative response to negative campaign ads.
Although academic research has yielded mixed results, candidates and consultants are rational people whose experience persuades them that "going negative" can be an effective campaign strategy under the right circumstances. And they are almost certainly right, even if their evidence is more anecdotal than systematic. This article considers whether the impact of negative ads is moderated by perceptions of issue ownership, a factor that is known to affect the candidate preferences of some voters. Focusing on the attitudes of those who identify with the party of the targeted candidate, we examine the changes in support and favorability induced by four policy-based attacks against a hypothetical congressional incumbent seeking reelection. Results from an Internet survey experiment suggest that attacks are somewhat more effective among target co-partisans who do not believe that their party is more competent to handle the issue in question, especially when that issue is salient to the individual.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.