Campaign Strategy and Impact in Eight Countries (Argentina, Chile, Colombia, Ecuador, El Salvador, Nicaragua, Peru, and Venezuela)

为什么负面竞选活动在一些国家如此普遍，而在其他国家却异常罕见？竞选基调的差异是否会影响选民对参与和民主进程的承诺？该项目提供并测试了一种政治竞选理论，并为拉丁美洲的八个国家建立了一个新的竞选信息数据集。竞选活动应在民主进程中发挥重要作用，向选民提供信息，以追究代表的责任，并对相互竞争的政策建议作出判断。此前的研究表明，美国选民在竞选期间获得了很多关于候选人和政党的信息和意见。然而，一些人认为，消极的“攻击”运动迷惑了选民，阻碍了投票，并增加了公民对政治进程的厌恶。在全球范围内，竞选活动在许多不同的背景下进行，并遵循许多不同的选举制度。例如，候选人可能会在政党强大、两极分化的国家竞选公职，或者在政党在政治上几乎不起作用的国家竞选公职。我的理论研究表明，政党制度类型将影响负面竞选活动：我们将在具有强大政党的系统中观察到更多负面竞选活动。同样，选举可以在封闭名单和开放名单比例代表制、决选选区、多成员多数以及美国常见的单一成员选区下举行。仔细研究这些规则就会发现，从理论上讲，某些背景下的竞选活动会比其他背景下更负面。特别是，负面竞选活动应该在地区选举中最常见，比如美国的地区选举，而在许多代表来自同一选区的制度中，负面竞选活动最弱。第二个问题与负面竞选活动对民主的影响有关。在老牌民主政体中，负面竞选活动的影响受到相当大的争议。消极的竞选活动可能会增加或减少公民对政治的参与、对民主的支持以及关于候选人和政党的信息。负面的竞选活动可能会对选民产生积极或消极的影响，具体取决于具体情况。在公民具有高度意识形态的地方，负面竞选活动提供信息并动员选民。在意识形态和党派意识较弱的地方，消极的竞选活动会令人困惑和幻想破灭。这两个问题是通过分析八个拉丁美洲国家的政治信息来测试的：阿根廷、智利、哥伦比亚、厄瓜多尔、萨尔瓦多、尼加拉瓜、秘鲁和委内瑞拉。2005年和2006年，这些国家都举行了重大选举，要么是立法选举，要么是总统选举，或者两者兼而有之。在这八个国家，实行的选举制度五花八门，政党实力水平差异很大。通过收集关于这些国家公职候选人竞选策略的数据，可以测试机构和背景对负面攻击活动程度的影响。通过收集民意数据，人们可以研究选民对负面政治信息和积极政治信息的反应是如何不同的。该项目在两个方面做出了重要贡献。首先，它有助于解决关于负面竞选对民主价值观的影响的辩论：改善或阻碍新民主政体的巩固。其次，它建议进行制度改革，酌情增加或减少负面竞选活动。

Why is negative campaigning so common in some countries, while exceptionally rare in others? Do differences in campaign tone affect voters' commitment to participation and the democratic process? This project offers and tests a theory of political campaigning, and builds a new dataset of campaign messages for eight countries in Latin America. Campaigns should play an important role in the democratic process, providing voters with information to hold representatives accountable and to pass judgement on competing policy proposals. Previous research shows that voters in the United States acquire much of their information and opinion on candidates and parties during campaigns. However, some have argued that negative "attack" campaigns confuse voters, discourage voting, and increase citizen disgust with the political process. Globally, campaigns are run in many different contexts and following many different electoral systems. For example, candidates may run for office in countries with strong, polarized parties, or in countries where political parties play little rule in politics. My theoretical work suggests that party system type will affect negative campaigning: we will observe more negative campaigning in systems with strong political parties. Similarly, elections may be held under closed-list and open-list proportional representation, run-off districts, multi-member plurality, as well as the single-member districts common in the United States. A careful examination of these rules suggests that, in theory, some contexts will promote more negative campaigning than in others. In particular, negative campaigning should be most common in district elections, like those in the United States, and weakest in systems where many representatives are elected from the same district. The second question pertains to the impact of negative campaigning on democracy. The effects of negative campaigning in established democracies are subject to considerable debate. Negative campaigning may increase or decrease citizens' participation in politics, support for democracy, and information about candidates and parties. Negative campaigning can have positive or negative impacts on voters, depending on context. Where citizens are highly ideological, negative campaigning provides information and mobilizes voters. Where ideology and partisanship are weaker, negative campaigning confuses and disillusions. These two questions are tested by analyzing political messages in eight Latin American countries: Argentina, Chile, Colombia, Ecuador, El Salvador, Nicaragua, Peru, and Venezuela. In 2005 and 2006, each of these countries held major elections, either legislative or presidential, or both. In these eight countries, a wide variety of electoral systems are in use, and levels of party strength vary widely. By collecting data on the campaign tactics of candidates for office in these countries, the impact of institutions and context on the extent of negative attack campaigns can be tested. By collecting public opinion data, one can examine how voters respond differently to negative than to positive political messages. This project makes an important contribution in two ways. First, it helps resolve the debate over the impact of negative campaigns on democratic values: improving or hindering the consolidation of new democracies. Second, it suggests institutional reforms to increase or decrease negative campaigning, as appropriate.