IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ecl/stabus/3360.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Snap Judgments: Voter Inferences Based on Candidate Photos Predict Electoral Success and Politician Quality

Author

Listed:
  • Casey, Katherine

    (Stanford University)

Abstract

Voting is fundamentally a forecasting problem: voters try to predict future performance in office based on incomplete information about candidates. Forecast inputs combine observable professional qualifications with more subjective assessments of confidence and trustworthiness. In developing countries, the amount of information available can be quite limited. This paper explores how well voters do in predicting candidate performance and quality under varying degrees and types of information. It leverages a series of lab-in-the-field experiments in a weak media environment where ballot photos are both the first and last visual impression many voters have of candidates. Inferences based on candidate photos alone predict who later wins actual elections. Further, these inferences are better at identifying trustworthy politicians (i.e. those who divert fewer public resources to personal use) than a suite of professional qualifications. Candidates with more electable faces appear to have stronger persuasion skills, which reflect advantages in both physical appearance and oral communication. Neither snap judgments based on photos nor observable characteristics distinguish politicians along concrete measures of effort.

Suggested Citation

  • Casey, Katherine, 2017. "Snap Judgments: Voter Inferences Based on Candidate Photos Predict Electoral Success and Politician Quality," Research Papers 3360, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
  • Handle: RePEc:ecl:stabus:3360
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.gsb.stanford.edu/gsb-cmis/gsb-cmis-download-auth/406931
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:ecl:stabus:3360. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/gsstaus.html .

    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.