Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

For more information, click here

CiteULike is a free service for managing and discovering scholarly references - click here to get started.

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Political Research Quarterly
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Jackson, R. A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Gubernatorial and Senatorial Camapaign Mobilization of Voters

Robert A. Jackson

Florida State University

This article examines the role of gubernatorial and U.S. Senate campaigns in mobilizing voters in the 1990, 1992, 1994, and 1996 elections. Merging contextual measures on these campaigns with data from the Voter Supplement Files of the November Current Population Surveys, I find that statewide campaigns are especially important for activating citizens in midterms. An off-year campaign environment that is associated with hotly-contested, high-spending campaigns elevates citizens' turnout probabilities by double-digit points. However, a presidential race provides an overriding stimulus that gets to the polls most of those citizens who can be activated, as state-level races demonstrate negligible mobilizing influence in the on-years. I also find that previous looks into the influence of campaign context on individual turnout are based on "biased" tests of statistical significance. Failure to take into account state "clusters" in national samples results in downwardly biased standard errors and, consequently, upwardly biased t-/z-values for state-level campaign coefficients. Finally, I consider the two-stage nature of electoral participation in the U.S.: (1) registration followed by (2) turnout among those who are registered. The activating influence of campaigns operates primarily at the second stage.

Political Research Quarterly, Vol. 55, No. 4, 825-844 (2002)
DOI: 10.1177/106591290205500405


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Political Research QuarterlyHome page
R. A. Jackson, J. J. Mondak, and R. Huckfeldt
Examining the Possible Corrosive Impact of Negative Advertising on Citizens' Attitudes toward Politics
Political Research Quarterly, March 1, 2009; 62(1): 55 - 69.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
American Politics ResearchHome page
C. J. Tolbert, D. C. Bowen, and T. Donovan
Initiative Campaigns: Direct Democracy and Voter Mobilization
American Politics Research, January 1, 2009; 37(1): 155 - 192.
[Abstract] [PDF]