1. An Analysis of Negativity
in the 2011-12 Presidential Primaries
Mia Moody-Ramirez, Ph.D. & Joseph Brown, Ph.D.,
Aundrea Payne, Madeline Lloyd and Lyzette Garza,

2. Discussion Points
•Definition of negativity
•History of negativity
•Concept of Competitive Position

3. Definitions of Negativity
Negativity:
•The process of going on the offensive.
•Ignores issues and party agendas.
•Emphasizes a candidate’s personal attributes or
personality traits.
•Includes language that is hostile or aggressive.

4. The History of Negativity
Negativity takes its origins in what
they called the “American
tradition of negative
campaigning.”
Newspapers were not
independent, but the voices of the
political part that controlled them.

5. The History of Negativity
One of the first negative television advertisements was
against President Dwight D. Eisenhower, entitled “How’s
that again, general?” It was aired in 1956.

6. Concept of Competitive Position
States frontrunner presidential primary candidates are
less likely to resort to negative campaigning in news
releases than their counterparts.
The competitive position model posits that negative
campaigning is directed against frontrunner and
Frontrunners tend to refrain from such behavior unless
attacked by an opponent.

7. Two camps of research on
Negative campaigning
Skaperdas and Grofman – prescribe a different tactic for each campaign situation
with the optimal mix of “positive” and “negative” spending reflecting relative strength
of the opponents.
Harrington and Hess – predicts different strategies based on the personal
characteristics of the candidates (or the public’s perception of those characteristics)
but no change in campaign tactics based solely on the position of the candidate in
the polls.
*

8. Candidate Position
Lovett and Shachar (2011) observed that candidates
are more likely to resort to negative campaigning when
they are behind in the polls, to slow the momentum of
frontrunners.
 Our study tried to see if this model is also true
within social media.

9. Propositions
(1) If a candidate’s initial support is sufficiently high relative to that of the opponent,
that candidate will not engage in negative campaigning.
(2) If candidate’s initial support is sufficiently low…then candidate may put all of his
effort into negative campaigning.
(3) The front-runner…engages in more positive and less negative campaigning
than his opponent.
The proposition that stragglers attack and front-runners do not are sometimes
viewed as “conventional wisdom” but before this study, there was little empirical
evidence to support this view.
Harrington and Hess suggest this so-called conventional wisdom is coincidence.
*

10. Study Importance
The study adds to the growing body of knowledge
seeking to identify and understand the precipitants of
negative campaigning.
The growing usage of the Internet as a source of
political information has spurred a growing interest in
the Internet as a tool for political campaigning