Ambivalence, Uncertainty, and Processes of Candidate Evaluation

The on-line and memory-based processing models of candidate evaluation can be better understood by incorporating the concepts of ambivalence and uncertainty, both as subjective feeling states and as objective properties of information. An experiment was designed to address three questions: What are the relationships between ambivalence and uncertainty? What are the informational foundations of subjective ambivalence and uncertainty, and to what extent are they rooted in on-line (time of exposure) and memory-based (time of judgment) processes? What are the consequences of ambivalence and uncertainty for candidate evaluation? The results suggest that (1) subjective uncertainty is more strongly rooted in information about the candidate than is subjective ambivalence; (2) subjective uncertainty and (to a lesser extent) ambivalence are associated with an increased propensity to engage in memory-based processing; and (3) subjective ambivalence and uncertainty result in more negative evaluations, particularly among less sophisticated people. These results suggest ways in which the on-line and memory-based models might productively be combined.

[1]  Michael A. Olson,et al.  Implicit measures in social cognition. research: their meaning and use. , 2003, Annual review of psychology.

[2]  Michael D. Martinez,et al.  Sometimes You Feel Like a Nut, Sometimes You Don't: Citizens' Ambivalence About Abortion , 2002 .

[3]  M. Zanna,et al.  Thinking and caring about cognitive inconsistency: when and for whom does attitudinal ambivalence feel uncomfortable? , 2002, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[4]  G. Maio,et al.  Expanding the Assessment of Attitude Components and Structure: The Benefits of Open-ended Measures , 2002 .

[5]  Jon A. Krosnick,et al.  Attitudes toward presidential candidates and political parties: Initial optimism, inertial first impressions, and a focus on flaws , 2001 .

[6]  David P. Redlawsk.  You Must Remember This: A Test of the On-Line Model of Voting , 2001, The Journal of Politics.

[7]  Howard G Lavine,et al.  The electoral consequences of ambivalence toward presidential candidates , 2001 .

[8]  N. Schwarz.  Feelings as information: Implications for affective influences on information processing. , 2001 .

[9]  R. Petty,et al.  Extending the bases of subjective attitudinal ambivalence: interpersonal and intrapersonal antecedents of evaluative tension. , 2001, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[10]  K. Mcgraw.  Contributions of the Cognitive Approach to Political Psychology , 2000 .

[11]  John L. Sullivan,et al.  On the Relationship Between Attitude Involvement and Attitude Accessibility: Toward a Cognitive-Motivational Model of Political Information Processing , 2000 .

[12]  R. Alvarez,et al.  Uncertainty and Candidate Personality Traits , 2000 .

[13]  J. Forgas,et al.  The message within : Toward a social psychology of subjective experiences , 2000 .

[14]  W. Rahn,et al.  Affect as Information: The Role of Public Mood in Political Reasoning , 2000 .

[15]  Dennis Chong.  Rational Lives: Norms and Values in Politics and Society , 2000 .

[16]  W. R. Neuman,et al.  Affective Intelligence and Political Judgment , 2000 .

[17]  Antony Stephen Reid Manstead,et al.  The importance of being selective: weighing the role of attribute importance in attitudinal judgment , 2000 .

[18]  Thomas E. Nelson.  Group Affect and Attribution in Social Policy Opinion , 1999, The Journal of Politics.

[19]  Robert S. Wyer,et al.  Correcting for Mood-Induced Bias in the Evaluation of Political Candidates: The Roles of Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivation , 1999 .

[20]  Albert Hadley Cantril,et al.  Reading Mixed Signals: Ambivalence in American Public Opinion about Government , 1999 .

[21]  Mark P. Zanna,et al.  On the Primacy of Affect in the Determination of Attitudes and Behavior: The Moderating Role of Affective-Cognitive Ambivalence , 1998 .

[22]  R. Michael Alvarez,et al.  Speaking in Two Voices: American Equivocation about the Internal Revenue Service , 1998 .

[23]  D. Kinder,et al.  Opinion and action in the realm of politics. , 1998 .

[24]  John M. Brehm,et al.  Are Americans Ambivalent Towards Racial Policies , 1997 .

[25]  J. Cacioppo,et al.  Beyond Bipolar Conceptualizations and Measures: The Case of Attitudes and Evaluative Space , 1997, Personality and social psychology review : an official journal of the Society for Personality and Social Psychology, Inc.

[26]  R. Michael Alvarez,et al.  Information and elections , 1997 .

[27]  Herbert Bless,et al.  Subjective Experience Versus Content of Information in the Construction of Attitude Judgments , 1996 .

[28]  J. N. Bassili.  Meta-judgmental versus operative indexes of psychological attributes: The case of measures of attitude strength. , 1996 .

[29]  R. Petty,et al.  The gradual threshold model of ambivalence: relating the positive and negative bases of attitudes to subjective ambivalence. , 1996, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[30]  Victor Ottati,et al.  Effects on mood during exposure to target information on subsequently reported judgments: An on-line model of misattribution and correction. , 1996 .

[31]  D. Hamilton,et al.  Perceiving persons and groups. , 1996, Psychological review.

[32]  R. Michael Alvarez,et al.  American Ambivalence Towards Abortion Policy: Development of a Heteroskedastic Probit Model of Competing Values , 1995 .

[33]  M. Lodge,et al.  The Responsive Voter: Campaign Information and the Dynamics of Candidate Evaluation , 1995, American Political Science Review.

[34]  M. Zanna,et al.  Let's not be indifferent about (attitudinal) ambivalence. , 1995 .

[35]  R. Petty,et al.  Attitude strength : antecedents and consequences , 1995 .

[36]  M. Banaji,et al.  Implicit social cognition: attitudes, self-esteem, and stereotypes. , 1995, Psychological review.

[37]  Marijke Breuning,et al.  Rationalization and Derivation Processes in Survey Studies of Political Candidate Evaluation , 1994 .

[38]  R. Michael Alvarez,et al.  Uncertainty and Political Perceptions , 1994, The Journal of Politics.

[39]  Steven J. Breckler,et al.  A Comparison of Numerical Indexes for Measuring Attitude Ambivalence , 1994 .

[40]  J. Cacioppo,et al.  Relationship between attitudes and evaluative space: A critical review, with emphasis on the separability of positive and negative substrates. , 1994 .

[41]  Michael X. Delli Carpini,et al.  Measuring Political Knowledge: Putting First Things First , 1993 .

[42]  Dennis Chong.  How People Think, Reason, and Feel about Rights and Liberties , 1993 .

[43]  S. Chaiken,et al.  The psychology of attitudes. , 1993 .

[44]  J. Zaller,et al.  The Nature and Origins of Mass Opinion. , 1992 .

[45]  S. Feldman,et al.  A Simple Theory of the Survey Response: Answering Questions versus Revealing Preferences , 1992 .

[46]  S. Feldman,et al.  The Political Culture of Ambivalence: Ideological Responses to the Welfare State , 1992 .

[47]  G. Clore.  Cognitive phenomenology: Feelings and the construction of judgment. , 1992 .

[48]  Richard A. Brody,et al.  Reasoning and Choice: Explorations in Political Psychology , 1991 .

[49]  Patrick J. Stroh,et al.  On-line processing in candidate evaluation: The effects of issue order, issue importance, and sophistication , 1990 .

[50]  N. Schwarz.  Feelings as information: Informational and motivational functions of affective states. , 1990 .

[51]  Roger Tourangeau,et al.  Belief accessibility and context effects in attitude measurement , 1989 .

[52]  Kathleen M. McGraw,et al.  An Impression-Driven Model of Candidate Evaluation , 1989, American Political Science Review.

[53]  Larry M. Bartels.  Issue Voting Under Uncertainty: An Empirical Test , 1986 .

[54]  R. Hastie,et al.  The relationship between memory and judgment depends on whether the judgment task is memory-based or on-line , 1986 .

[55]  E. Wertheim,et al.  Depression, guilt, and self-management of pleasant and unpleasant events. , 1983, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[56]  G. Clore,et al.  Mood, misattribution, and judgments of well-being: Informative and directive functions of affective states. , 1983 .

[57]  J. Cacioppo,et al.  The need for cognition. , 1982 .

[58]  Benjamin I. Page.  Choices and echoes in Presidential elections , 1978 .

[59]  Thad W. Mirer,et al.  The Simple Act of Voting , 1974, American Political Science Review.

[60]  K. Shepsle.  The Strategy of Ambiguity: Uncertainty and Electoral Competition , 1972, American Political Science Review.

[61]  K. Kaplan.  On the ambivalence-indifference problem in attitude theory and measurement: A suggested modification of the semantic differential technique. , 1972 .

[62]  W. A. Scott.  Brief Report : Measures Of Cognitive Structure. , 1966, Multivariate behavioral research.

[63]  A. Downs.  An Economic Theory of Democracy , 1957 .