Explore is retiring!

Look for faculty profiles in GUFaculty360, coming this fall.

Important notice for internal users:
Internal editing access will be disabled as of June 1, 2017 to ensure data integrity for the new system. We appologize for any inconvenience this may cause. For questions, or if you'd like to be a part of the test group for GUFaculty360, please contact us at gu360help@georgetown.edu. Thank you for your understanding.

Sharp Elbows on the Airwaves: Do Primary “Reforms” Provoke Negative Ads? | Publications | Georgetown University Georgetown University home page Search: Full text search Site Index: Find a web site by name or keyword Site Map: Overview of main pages Directory: Find a person; contact us About this site: Copyright, disclaimer, policies, terms of use Georgetown University home page Home page for prospective students Home page for current students Home page for alumni and alumnae Home page for family and friends Home page for faculty and staff Georgetown University Search: Full text search Site Index: Find a web site by name or keyword Site Map: Overview of main pages Directory: Find a person; contact us About this site: Copyright, disclaimer, policies, terms of use
Navigation bar Navigation bar
spacer spacer spacer spacer
border
spacer spacer spacer
border
spacer spacer

Sharp Elbows on the Airwaves: Do Primary “Reforms” Provoke Negative Ads?

Christopher C. Hull. "Sharp Elbows on the Airwaves: Do Primary “Reforms” Provoke Negative Ads?." Annual Meeting. Chicago, Ill.: Midwest Political Science Association , 2006.

Are presidential primary process “reforms” provoking more negative campaigning? Specifically, have parties’ decisions since the early 1970s that have favored primaries over caucuses increased the likelihood of attack ads on television by turning the nomination process into a series of mini-general elections? As a first step to help answer this question, this preliminary paper explores a 53,000+-case database of television advertisements from the 2000 presidential nomination process. It builds two statistical models to estimate the impact of nomination contest type (primaries vs. caucuses) on ad negativity. It finds that in 2000, ads run in presidential primaries were three times as likely to be attack ads as those run in caucuses, a difference that was highly statistically significant in both models. The results hint that primary process reforms may be playing a role in provoking more negative campaigning in the presidential nomination process.

More about this publication

spacer spacer
Navigation bar Navigation bar