Replication Data for: When and Why Are Campaigns' Persuasive Effects Small? Evidence from the 2020 US Presidential Election
<|begin_of_text|><|start_header_id|>system<|end_header_id|> You are a research archivist expert in dataset metadata. Answer the question truthfully.  <|eot_id|><|start_header_id|>user<|end_header_id|> Here is the Description of a dataset. Description:'Why do political campaigns so often fail to persuade voters, and what does this say about voter decision-making? Some interpret the difficulty of persuading voters as evidence that voters remain loyal to their parties even when confronted with new information. However, an informational (quasi-Bayesian) mechanism may also contribute. We test empirical implications of these alternatives with four survey experiments (total n=113,742) conducted during the 2020 Presidential election that exposed individuals to 291 messages. Our results support the quasi-Bayesian interpretation: we show that voters are more persuadable with information about candidates they know less about; that persuasive messages change both candidate evaluations and vote choices, and induce partisan defection; and that messages with more informational content are more pers' . Please return only a json list of at most 3 Keywords corresponding to the Description:.<|eot_id|><|start_header_id|>assistant<|end_header_id|> {"Answer" : ["Bayesian reasoning","Campaign persuasion"]} <|eot_id|>
 Here is the Description of a dataset. Description:'Why do political campaigns so often fail to persuade voters, and what does this say about voter decision-making? Some interpret the difficulty of persuading voters as evidence that voters remain loyal to their parties even when confronted with new information. However, an informational (quasi-Bayesian) mechanism may also contribute. We test empirical implications of these alternatives with four survey experiments (total n=113,742) conducted during the 2020 Presidential election that exposed individuals to 291 messages. Our results support the quasi-Bayesian interpretation: we show that voters are more persuadable with information about candidates they know less about; that persuasive messages change both candidate evaluations and vote choices, and induce partisan defection; and that messages with more informational content are more pers' . Please return only a json list of at most 3 Keywords corresponding to the Description:.
Why do political campaigns so often fail to persuade voters, and what does this say about voter decision-making? Some interpret the difficulty of persuading voters as evidence that voters remain loyal to their parties even when confronted with new information. However, an informational (quasi-Bayesian) mechanism may also contribute. We test empirical implications of these alternatives with four survey experiments (total n=113,742) conducted during the 2020 Presidential election that exposed individuals to 291 messages. Our results support the quasi-Bayesian interpretation: we show that voters are more persuadable with information about candidates they know less about; that persuasive messages change both candidate evaluations and vote choices, and induce partisan defection; and that messages with more informational content are more pers
Bayesian reasoning; Campaign persuasion