Research

The main focus of my research is on the discussion of issues in political campaigns. Existing theories of issue emphasis by candidates center around priming strategies, in which candidates emphasize favorable issues in order to increase their salience, but empirical studies have consistently shown that competing candidates often discuss many of the same issues, particularly when those issues are highly salient. My dissertation begins with the assumption that these candidates are not being irrational—that they are instead calculating that there is sometimes more to be gained by improving one’s standing on a salient issue than by trying to change the subject. I then develop a number of alternative strategies to priming which are implied by the broader literature on vote choice and public opinion, investigate the extent to which candidates’ choice of strategies is driven by campaign context, and study the impacts these strategies have on voters.

At the same time, I continue to work on separate projects with other researchers, including Jonathan Nagler, Josh Tucker, and Ted Brader. Topics addressed in these projects include the effects of demographic cross-pressures on voter behavior, the impacts of negative advertising on candidate evaluations, and the role of political sophistication in predicting voter turnout.

Working Papers

“The Cross-Pressured Citizen: Revisiting Social Influence on Voting Behavior”
(with Joshua A. Tucker and Ted Brader)
MPSA Paper | MPSA Slides | Princeton CSDP Slides

“Issue Ownership, Party Reputations, and Policy Positions: Where Issue Ownership Comes From, and Why the Answer Matters”
Draft (last updated: 11/09)

“The Impact of Negative Advertising on Turnout: Explaining Why it is Sometimes Positive, and Sometimes Not”
(with Jonathan Nagler and Jan Leighley)

“Taking Campaign Strategy Online: Issue Emphasis and Candidate Websites, 2002–2008?

“Is Anybody Listening? The Impact of Issue Appeals in Presidential Campaigns”