In 2004, roughly 44% of presidential candidate–sponsored political ads were negatively framed, with more than 90% of the attack ads featuring direct attacks against the opponent's persona and/or policies. Perhaps the presence of attack ads by 527 groups lowered the bar for candidate-sponsored ads, as the electorate was desensitized by the mudslinging barrage. Although candidate evaluations are higher after candidate-sponsored than party-sponsored attack ads, backlash fears mitigated the negativity of many candidate-sponsored ads. Nonetheless, negativity pervaded many of these presidential candidate–sponsored ads. Perhaps backlash fears have decreased to the point that candidates no longer dread the repercussions of negative ads.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Torres et al. (2012) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: