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

为什么负面竞选在一些国家如此普遍，而在另一些国家却异常罕见？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，使代表承担责任，并对相互竞争的政策提案作出判断。以前的研究表明，美国选民在竞选期间获得了他们对候选人和政党的大部分信息和意见。然而，一些人认为，负面的"攻击"运动混淆了选民，阻碍了投票，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，候选人可能在政党强大、两极分化的国家或政党在政治中几乎不起作用的国家竞选公职。我的理论工作表明，政党制度类型会影响负面竞选：我们将观察到更多的负面竞选制度与强大的政党。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、多成员多数制以及美国常见的单一成员选区下举行。对这些规则的仔细研究表明，在理论上，某些情况下会比其他情况下促进更多的负面竞选活动。特别是，负面竞选活动在地区选举中应该是最常见的，就像美国的选举一样，在许多代表从同一地区选出的制度中最弱。 第二个问题涉及负面竞选活动对民主的影响。在已建立的民主国家中，负面竞选活动的影响受到相当多的辩论。负面竞选活动可能会增加或减少公民对政治的参与，对民主的支持以及有关候选人和政党的信息。负面竞选活动可能对选民产生积极或消极的影响，这取决于背景。在公民高度意识形态化的地方，负面竞选活动提供信息并动员选民。在意识形态和党派偏见较弱的地方，负面的竞选活动会造成混乱和幻灭。 这两个问题通过分析八个拉丁美洲国家的政治信息来测试：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，或立法选举，或总统选举，或两者兼而有之。在这八个国家中，采用了各种各样的选举制度，政党实力的水平也相差很大。通过收集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运动程度的影响。通过收集民意数据，人们可以研究选民对消极政治信息和积极政治信息的反应如何不同。 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运动对民主价值观的影响的辩论：是促进还是阻碍新民主的巩固。第二，它建议进行体制改革，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.