Vincent L. Hutchings University of Michigan Nicholas A. Valentino University of Texas Wedge Politics: The Structure & Function of Racial Group Cues in American Politics

We explore how elite communications strategies affect the criteria people use when making political judgments. Specifically, we examine the impact that elite messages on race have on the weight people assign to race-relevant attitudes when voting. This process is referred to as “racial priming.” This process is referred to as “racial priming.” Overview of Research Program

Throughout U.S. history, candidates have sought to activate or prime racial attitudes in order to gain political advantage. Throughout U.S. history, candidates have sought to activate or prime racial attitudes in order to gain political advantage. Conventional wisdom holds that, in the aftermath of the Civil Rights Movement, racial appeals have either disappeared... Or, contemporary racial appeals have become more implicit relying on “code words” and indirect references to African Americans. Observations on Racial Priming in Political Campaigns

“Subtle racial appeals” and “racial code words” are about conservative politics and not race. “Subtle racial appeals” and “racial code words” are about conservative politics and not race. Even if implicit appeals intend to prime racial attitudes they are too subtle to affect most voters. If implicit racial appeals are perceived as racial, then most voters would reject them. Arguments Against the Contemporary Use of Implicit Racial Appeals

Mendelberg agrees with some of the criticisms of racial priming. Mendelberg agrees with some of the criticisms of racial priming. She agrees that almost all voters will reject explicit racial appeals in contemporary politics. Therefore, candidates must craft ambiguous messages that only indirectly evoke racial stereotypes. These subtle appeals are effective because they make voters latent racial attitudes more accessible in memory. Mendelberg’s Theory of Racial Priming

1. Can subtle racial cues prime racial attitudes? Does the appeal have to focus on crime or welfare? Does the appeal have to focus on crime or welfare? 2. How do subtle racial appeals prime racial attitudes? Does the type of cue matter? Does the type of cue matter? What is the psychological process that drives the effect? What is the psychological process that drives the effect? 3. Is it possible that (at least some) explicit racial appeals might also prime racial attitudes? Research Questions

We argue that racial group cues vary along at least three important dimensions. We argue that racial group cues vary along at least three important dimensions. 1. Cues vary continuously in terms of racial salience. Mendelberg’s dichotomous implicit/explicit distinction may be too blunt. Mendelberg’s dichotomous implicit/explicit distinction may be too blunt. Expanding the Theory of Racial Priming

Priming Race in Vote Choice with Negative Stereotypes Salience of Race Message NoneLowModerateHigh Priming Effect Size

2. Racial cues vary in the degree to which they reinforce negative stereotypes. 3. Cues vary in terms of the degree to which they signal distinctiveness between the candidates with respect to racial issue. Expanding the Theory of Racial Priming (continued)

Implicit racial cues work only when they reinforce negative stereotypes. Implicit racial cues are most effective when moderately subtle. Such appeals are effective because they operate via an automatic cognitive process. Such appeals are effective because they operate via an automatic cognitive process. Explicit racial cues can be effective when they are stereotype neutral. They also work best when highlighting candidate distinctiveness. They also work best when highlighting candidate distinctiveness. Hypotheses

Three experiments were run on adult non-student subjects from Ann Arbor in summer of Experiment #1: 293 Non-Black subjects randomly assigned to one of seven conditions. Implicit racial cues were manipulated. Implicit racial cues were manipulated. Subjects viewed two product ads (filler) and one political ad sponsored by candidate George Bush. The political ads carried the racial cue. The political ads carried the racial cue. Data & Methods

Control: No political ad viewed. Low race salience: Wasteful spending message but neutral visual cues. Moderate race salience: Wasteful spending message and Black visual cues. High race salience: Wasteful spending message and Black & White visual cues. Experiment #1: Design

Neutral Race Salience

Moderate Race Salience

High Race Salience

Table 1. The Impact of Whites’ Racial Attitudes on Vote Choice, by Condition Racial Resent. Laissez Faire Black Influence Affirm. Action Racial Attitude (see Column) Low Salience Mod. Salience *-.27*-0.25 High Salience Attitude* Low * * Attitude * Mod..61*.77**.60**.51* Attitude* High *.46*0.18 N 156 * p <.05; ** p <.01 for one-tailed test. Support for Bush scored high (0-1).

Implicit racial cues do not prime party identification, individualism, or egalitarianism. Counter-stereotypic racial appeals do not prime racial attitudes. E.g. pairing Black images with sympathetic narration is ineffective. E.g. pairing Black images with sympathetic narration is ineffective. E.g. pairing White images with unsympathetic narration is ineffective. E.g. pairing White images with unsympathetic narration is ineffective. The Limits of Implicit Racial Appeals

Sample: One hundred and eleven White subjects assigned to one of two conditions (plus control). Experimental Design: Control (no racial story). Control (no racial story). Presidential candidates similar on racial issues. Presidential candidates similar on racial issues. Presidential candidates different on racial issues. Presidential candidates different on racial issues. Hypothesis: Explicit racial appeals can prime racial attitudes if message non-stereotypic. Experiment #2: Explicit Race Cues in Campaign News

Race Similar Condition

Race Different Condition

Figure 2: Predicted Support for Bush by Condition (Political Independents)

Sample: 174 White subjects assigned to one of four conditions (plus control). Experimental Design: Control (no candidate ad). Control (no candidate ad). Party-based Gore appeal. Party-based Gore appeal. Ideology-based Gore appeal. Ideology-based Gore appeal. Character-based Gore appeal. Character-based Gore appeal. Group (including race) based Gore appeal. Group (including race) based Gore appeal. Hypothesis: Explicit racial appeals seeking Black support can also prime racial attitudes. Experiment #3: Outreach to African Americans

Gore Group-Based Political Appeal

Figure 3: Predicted Support for Bush by Condition (Political Independents)

Racial priming is triggered by a much wider range of racial cues than suggested by previous work. The psychological mechanism underlying implicit racial appeals is automatic and not controlled. Explicit racial appeals can also prime racial attitudes, provided they are non-stereotypic. Highlighting candidate distinctiveness is also important. Highlighting candidate distinctiveness is also important. We are currently content-analyzing the campaign environment to determine when group cues arise. Summary & Future Work