IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/custns/v6y2019i3d10.1007_s40547-019-0092-z.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Examining Brand Strength of Political Candidates: a Performance Premium Approach

Author

Listed:
  • Beth L. Fossen

    (Indiana University)

  • David A. Schweidel

    (Emory University)

  • Michael Lewis

    (Emory University)

Abstract

Despite the growth of research on political marketing, fundamental questions concerning brand value of political candidates and its relationship with marketing mix activities remain unanswered. This research extends premium-based brand valuation methods to the political context by presenting a performance premium approach to assessing the strength of politicians’ brands and exploring the relationship between politician brand strength and political advertising. We develop a joint hierarchical Bayesian model of brand performance and marketing activity and estimate our model using data on the election performance and advertising expenditures of political candidates from US House of Representatives elections. Our findings suggest that politicians who possess a strong brand—those that perform better than expected given the partisan leanings of their districts, advertising spending, and other model controls—face a consequence for their brand strength in which political advertising by their opponents has a stronger negative impact on their performance compared to the effect of political advertising against politicians with weaker brands. We discuss the implications of our findings for political marketing.

Suggested Citation

  • Beth L. Fossen & David A. Schweidel & Michael Lewis, 2019. "Examining Brand Strength of Political Candidates: a Performance Premium Approach," Customer Needs and Solutions, Springer;Institute for Sustainable Innovation and Growth (iSIG), vol. 6(3), pages 63-75, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:custns:v:6:y:2019:i:3:d:10.1007_s40547-019-0092-z
    DOI: 10.1007/s40547-019-0092-z
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s40547-019-0092-z
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s40547-019-0092-z?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Brett R. Gordon & Wesley R. Hartmann, 2013. "Advertising Effects in Presidential Elections," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(1), pages 19-35, June.
    2. Gerber, Alan, 1998. "Estimating the Effect of Campaign Spending on Senate Election Outcomes Using Instrumental Variables," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 92(2), pages 401-411, June.
    3. David A. Schweidel & George Knox, 2013. "Incorporating Direct Marketing Activity into Latent Attrition Models," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(3), pages 471-487, May.
    4. Aragones, Enriqueta & Palfrey, Thomas R., 2004. "The Effect of Candidate Quality on Electoral Equilibrium: An Experimental Study," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 98(1), pages 77-90, February.
    5. Kumar, Anand & Krishnan, Shanker, 2004. "Memory Interference in Advertising: A Replication and Extension," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 30(4), pages 602-611, March.
    6. Kenny, Christopher & McBurnett, Michael, 1994. "An Individual-Level Multiequation Model of Expenditure Effects in Contested House Elections," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 88(3), pages 699-707, September.
    7. Alan Gerber, 2004. "Does campaign spending work?," Natural Field Experiments 00246, The Field Experiments Website.
    8. Yanwen Wang & Michael Lewis & David A. Schweidel, 2018. "A Border Strategy Analysis of Ad Source and Message Tone in Senatorial Campaigns," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 37(3), pages 333-355, May.
    9. Park, David K. & Gelman, Andrew & Bafumi, Joseph, 2004. "Bayesian Multilevel Estimation with Poststratification: State-Level Estimates from National Polls," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 12(4), pages 375-385.
    10. Kevin Lane Keller & Donald R. Lehmann, 2006. "Brands and Branding: Research Findings and Future Priorities," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(6), pages 740-759, 11-12.
    11. Wendy W. Moe & David A. Schweidel, 2012. "Online Product Opinions: Incidence, Evaluation, and Evolution," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 31(3), pages 372-386, May.
    12. Jacobson, Gary C., 1978. "The Effects of Campaign Spending in Congressional Elections," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 72(2), pages 469-491, June.
    13. Campbell, Margaret C & Keller, Kevin Lane, 2003. "Brand Familiarity and Advertising Repetition Effects," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 30(2), pages 292-304, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. David A. Schweidel & Neil Bendle, 2019. "Marketing and Politics: Strange Bedfellows no More," Customer Needs and Solutions, Springer;Institute for Sustainable Innovation and Growth (iSIG), vol. 6(3), pages 37-40, December.

    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. Brett Gordon & Mitchell Lovett & Ron Shachar & Kevin Arceneaux & Sridhar Moorthy & Michael Peress & Akshay Rao & Subrata Sen & David Soberman & Oleg Urminsky, 2012. "Marketing and politics: Models, behavior, and policy implications," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 23(2), pages 391-403, June.
    2. Brett R. Gordon & Wesley R. Hartmann, 2013. "Advertising Effects in Presidential Elections," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(1), pages 19-35, June.
    3. Julia Cage & Edgard Dewitte, 2021. "It Takes Money to Make MPs: Evidence from 150 Years of British Campaign Spending," SciencePo Working papers Main hal-03384143, HAL.
    4. Jeffrey Milyo, 2013. "Campaign Spending and Electoral Competition: Towards More Policy Relevant Research," Working Papers 1311, Department of Economics, University of Missouri.
    5. Julia Cage & Edgard Dewitte, 2021. "It Takes Money to Make MPs: Evidence from 150 Years of British Campaign Spending," Sciences Po publications 2021-08, Sciences Po.
    6. Bekkouche, Yasmine & Cagé, Julia & Dewitte, Edgard, 2022. "The heterogeneous price of a vote: Evidence from multiparty systems, 1993–2017," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 206(C).
    7. Hoyong Jung, 2022. "Examining the relationship between political spending and legislative activities," Bulletin of Economic Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 74(2), pages 539-568, April.
    8. repec:hal:spmain:info:hdl:2441/1dp7827s4n8ht8fk3qhmeuvd0o is not listed on IDEAS
    9. repec:hal:spmain:info:hdl:2441/10lirmbd5p8h4ae52oi51b4cka is not listed on IDEAS
    10. repec:hal:spmain:info:hdl:2441/2ahul47tb09rvqfl9eelv7o5ca is not listed on IDEAS
    11. Cagé, Julia & Bekkouche, Yasmine, 2018. "The Heterogeneous Price of a Vote: Evidence from France, 1993-2014," CEPR Discussion Papers 12614, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    12. repec:hal:wpspec:info:hdl:2441/2ahul47tb09rvqfl9eelv7o5ca is not listed on IDEAS
    13. Bekkouche, Yasmine & Cagé, Julia & Dewitte, Edgard, 2022. "The heterogeneous price of a vote: Evidence from multiparty systems, 1993–2017," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 206(C).
    14. Yasmine Bekkouche & Julia Cage, 2019. "The Heterogeneous Price of a Vote: Evidence from France, 1993-2014," SciencePo Working papers Main hal-03393084, HAL.
    15. repec:hal:wpspec:info:hdl:2441/10lirmbd5p8h4ae52oi51b4cka is not listed on IDEAS
    16. repec:hal:wpspec:info:hdl:2441/1dp7827s4n8ht8fk3qhmeuvd0o is not listed on IDEAS
    17. Thomas Sexton & Herbert Lewis, 2012. "Measuring efficiency in the presence of head-to-head competition," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 38(2), pages 183-197, October.
    18. Jake Hoskins & Shyam Gopinath & J. Cameron Verhaal & Elham Yazdani, 2021. "The influence of the online community, professional critics, and location similarity on review ratings for niche and mainstream brands," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 49(6), pages 1065-1087, November.
    19. Yasmine Bekkouche & Julia Cage & Edgard Dewitte, 2022. "The Heterogeneous Price of a Vote: Evidence from Multiparty Systems, 1993-2017," SciencePo Working papers Main hal-03389172, HAL.
    20. Anne E. Baker, 2021. "Loan Financing as a Tool for Nonincumbent House Candidates," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 102(4), pages 1466-1483, July.
    21. van Esch, Patrick & Gadsby, Casey Lynn, 2019. "Marketing the healthiness of sports drinks: From physiological to cognitive based benefits," Australasian marketing journal, Elsevier, vol. 27(3), pages 179-186.
    22. Alan Gerber & Daniel Kessler & Marc Meredith, 2008. "The Persuasive Effects of Direct Mail: A Regression Discontinuity Approach," NBER Working Papers 14206, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    23. Beth L. Fossen & Girish Mallapragada & Anwesha De, 2021. "Impact of Political Television Advertisements on Viewers’ Response to Subsequent Advertisements," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 40(2), pages 305-324, March.
    24. Julia Cage & Yasmine Bekkouche, 2018. "The Price of a Vote: Evidence from France, 1993-2014," Sciences Po publications 12614, Sciences Po.
    25. Mitchell J. Lovett, 2019. "Empirical Research on Political Marketing: a Selected Review," Customer Needs and Solutions, Springer;Institute for Sustainable Innovation and Growth (iSIG), vol. 6(3), pages 49-56, December.
    26. Yangguang Huang & Ming He, 2021. "Structural Analysis Of Tullock Contests With An Application To U.S. House Of Representatives Elections," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 62(3), pages 1011-1054, August.

    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:spr:custns:v:6:y:2019:i:3:d:10.1007_s40547-019-0092-z. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.