The small effects of political advertising are small regardless of context, message, sender, or receiver: Evidence from 59 real-time randomized experiments

• Published in: Science advances Vol. 6; no. 36
• Main Authors: Coppock, Alexander, Hill, Seth J., Vavreck, Lynn
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: United States American Association for the Advancement of Science 01.09.2020
• Subjects: SciAdv r-articles; Social Sciences
• ISSN: 2375-2548; 2375-2548
• DOI: 10.1126/sciadv.abc4046

Campaign persuasion operates with notable consistency across political parties, message tone, and information environment. Evidence across social science indicates that average effects of persuasive messages are small. One commonly offered explanation for these small effects is heterogeneity: Persuasion may only work well in specific circumstances. To evaluate heterogeneity, we repeated an experiment weekly in real time using 2016 U.S. presidential election campaign advertisements. We tested 49 political advertisements in 59 unique experiments on 34,000 people. We investigate heterogeneous effects by sender (candidates or groups), receiver (subject partisanship), content (attack or promotional), and context (battleground versus non-battleground, primary versus general election, and early versus late). We find small average effects on candidate favorability and vote. These small effects, however, do not mask substantial heterogeneity even where theory from political science suggests that we should find it. During the primary and general election, in battleground states, for Democrats, Republicans, and Independents, effects are similarly small. Heterogeneity with large offsetting effects is not the source of small average effects.