IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/socsci/v103y2022i4p959-974.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Say it again with feeling: Issue ownership and candidate communication using Twitter

Author

Listed:
  • Adam M. Enders
  • Jason Gainous
  • Kevin M. Wagner

Abstract

Objectives We investigate to what extent partisan political candidates in the United States pay attention to different issues in their campaign communication, and whether they systematically deliver messages using different types of sentiment. Methods We analyze the 267,538 tweets issued by candidates for the U.S. Congress during the 2018 midterm elections using a combination of latent topic modeling, sentiment analysis, and regression analysis, estimating both issue emphasis and the emotional tone of communications. Results We find that candidates discussed a small number of distinct issues. Sentiment analysis reveals that the emotions used to convey these topics varied considerably more than interparty emphasis. Moreover, we observe that Democrats and Republicans discussed the same topics in very different ways, with Democrats—the out‐party at the time—proving more negative in their messaging. Conclusions When partisans discuss those issues their respective parties “own,” there are asymmetries in the emotion they use to communicate about these issues. The concept and measurement of issue ownership are complicated.

Suggested Citation

  • Adam M. Enders & Jason Gainous & Kevin M. Wagner, 2022. "Say it again with feeling: Issue ownership and candidate communication using Twitter," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 103(4), pages 959-974, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:socsci:v:103:y:2022:i:4:p:959-974
    DOI: 10.1111/ssqu.13176
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/ssqu.13176
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/ssqu.13176?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Aarã˜E, Lene & Petersen, Michael Bang & Arceneaux, Kevin, 2017. "The Behavioral Immune System Shapes Political Intuitions: Why and How Individual Differences in Disgust Sensitivity Underlie Opposition to Immigration," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 111(2), pages 277-294, May.
    2. Therriault, Andrew, 2015. "Whose Issue Is It Anyway? A New Look at the Meaning and Measurement of Issue Ownership," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 45(4), pages 929-938, October.
    3. Ted Brader & Nicholas A. Valentino & Elizabeth Suhay, 2008. "What Triggers Public Opposition to Immigration? Anxiety, Group Cues, and Immigration Threat," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 52(4), pages 959-978, October.
    4. Marcus, George E. & MacKuen, Michael B., 1993. "Anxiety, Enthusiasm, and the Vote: The Emotional Underpinnings of Learning and Involvement During Presidential Campaigns," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 87(3), pages 672-685, September.
    5. Kahn, Kim Fridkin & Kenney, Patrick J., 1999. "Do Negative Campaigns Mobilize or Suppress Turnout? Clarifying the Relationship between Negativity and Participation," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 93(4), pages 877-889, December.
    6. Jacoby, William G., 2014. "Is There a Culture War? Conflicting Value Structures in American Public Opinion," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 108(4), pages 754-771, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Sofia Vasilopoulou & Markus Wagner, 2017. "Fear, anger and enthusiasm about the European Union: Effects of emotional reactions on public preferences towards European integration," European Union Politics, , vol. 18(3), pages 382-405, September.
    2. Mark Pickup & Eline A. de Rooij & Clifton van der Linden & Matthew J. Goodwin, 2021. "Brexit, COVID‐19, and attitudes toward immigration in Britain," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 102(5), pages 2184-2193, September.
    3. Hix, Simon & Kaufmann, Eric & Leeper, Thomas J., 2020. "Pricing immigration," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 103268, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    4. Giovanni Facchini & Anna Maria Mayda & Riccardo Puglisi, 2017. "Illegal immigration and media exposure: evidence on individual attitudes," IZA Journal of Migration and Development, Springer;Forschungsinstitut zur Zukunft der Arbeit GmbH (IZA), vol. 7(1), pages 1-36, December.
    5. Parker Hevron, 2018. "Judicialization and Its Effects: Experiments as a Way Forward," Laws, MDPI, vol. 7(2), pages 1-21, May.
    6. Cattaneo, Cristina & Grieco, Daniela, 2021. "Turning opposition into support to immigration: The role of narratives," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 190(C), pages 785-801.
    7. Wood, Reed M. & Juanchich, Marie & Ramirez, Mark & Zhang, Shenghao, 2023. "Promoting COVID-19 vaccine confidence through public responses to misinformation: The joint influence of message source and message content," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 324(C).
    8. Vincenzo Galasso & Tommaso Nannicini, 2016. "Persuasion and Gender: Experimental Evidence from Two Political Campaigns," CESifo Working Paper Series 5868, CESifo.
    9. Kehrberg Jason, 2020. "Authoritarianism, Prejudice, and Support for Welfare Chauvinism in the United States," Statistics, Politics and Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 11(2), pages 195-212, December.
    10. David Soberman & Loïc Sadoulet, 2007. "Campaign Spending Limits and Political Advertising," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 53(10), pages 1521-1532, October.
    11. Maja Adena & Ruben Enikolopov & Maria Petrova & Veronica Santarosa & Ekaterina Zhuravskaya, 2015. "Radio and the Rise of The Nazis in Prewar Germany," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 130(4), pages 1885-1939.
    12. Galasso, Vincenzo & Nannicini, Tommaso, 2013. "Men Vote in Mars, Women Vote in Venus: A Survey Experiment in the Field," CEPR Discussion Papers 9547, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    13. Elliott Ash & Massimo Morelli & Richard Van Weelden, 2015. "Elections and Divisiveness: Theory and Evidence," NBER Working Papers 21422, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    14. Wenmei Liao & Dong Xiang & Meiqiu Chen & Jiangli Yu & Qianfeng Luo, 2018. "The Impact of Perceived Value on Farmers’ Regret Mood Tendency," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(10), pages 1-14, October.
    15. Sonia Capelli & William Sabadie & Olivier Trendel, 2009. "Président, fais moi rire ! La communication politique entre peur et humour," Grenoble Ecole de Management (Post-Print) halshs-00467982, HAL.
    16. Markaki, Yvonni, 2012. "Sources of anti-immigration attitudes in the United Kingdom: the impact of population, labour market and skills context," ISER Working Paper Series 2012-24, Institute for Social and Economic Research.
    17. Rustam Romaniuc & Gregory J. DeAngelo & Dimitri Dubois & Bryan C. McCannon, 2019. "Intergroup inequality and the breakdown of prosociality," Economics of Governance, Springer, vol. 20(3), pages 285-303, September.
    18. Nikhar Gaikwad & Gareth Nellis, 2017. "The Majority‐Minority Divide in Attitudes toward Internal Migration: Evidence from Mumbai," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 61(2), pages 456-472, April.
    19. Jha, Anand & Boudreaux, Christopher J. & Banerjee, Vasabjit, 2018. "Political leanings and social capital," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 95-105.
    20. Dikla Perez & Yael Steinhart & Amir Grinstein & Meike Morren, 2021. "Consistency in identity-related sequential decisions," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(12), pages 1-26, December.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:socsci:v:103:y:2022:i:4:p:959-974. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0038-4941 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.