The Third-Person Effects of Political Attack Ads in the 2004 U.S. Presidential Election

Abstract

This study examines the indirect effects of extensive negative political attack ads in the 2004 presidential election from a third-person effects perspective. Results of a survey using a probability sample of 496 college students indicate that these students believe attack ads harm others more than themselves. Moreover, the respondents tended to perceive attack ads in traditional media to have a greater harmful effect on self and others than attack ads on the Internet. Contingent factors that account for the magnitude of third-person effects include social distance and knowledge. Further, exposure to attack ads was found to be the strongest predictor of perceived harms of such ads on self and others, but only perceived harm on others is a significant predictor of support for restrictions on attack ads. The study contributes to research on the third-person effect by testing perceived harms of attack ads on self and others separately on likelihood to support restrictions.

Notes

Note. Figures in parentheses are standard deviations.

Note. Figures in parentheses are standard deviations. Except the difference between newspaper and Internet on perceive effects on USC students (t = –2.26, p < .05), all the differences among TV, newspaper, and Internet on the three perceived effects are significant at

p < .001.

Note. Beta weights are from final regression equation with all blocks of variables in the model. N = 419. Variables coded, or recoded, as follows: gender (1 = man, 0 = woman); knowledge about the attack ads ranged from 1 (not at all knowledgeable) to 5 (extremely knowledgeable); TV use and Internet use (hrs per day); newspaper use (days per week); perceived effects on self and others ranged from 1 (no harmful effect) to 5 (a great deal of harmful effect); Exposure to attack ads ranged from 1 (never) to 4 (often).

Note. Beta weights are from final regression equation with all blocks of variables in the model. N = 419. Variables coded, or recoded, as follows: gender (0 = man, 1 = woman); race (1 = White, 0 = other); knowledge about the attack ads ranged from 1 (not at all knowledgeable) to 5 (extremely knowledgeable); TV use and Internet use (hrs per day); newspaper use (days per week); perceived effects on self and others ranged from 1 (no harmful effect) to 5 (a great deal of harmful effect). Support for restriction of attack ads ranged from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree).

***p < .001.

**p < .01.

*p < .05. +p < .10.

¹The ratio between male and female students in the sample was 47.9% vs. 52.1%, while the same ratio at the University was 45.65% vs. 54.35%. A chi-square test shows that there is no difference between the sample and population (χ2 = 1.17, df = 1, p >.05). The mean age of the population was 21 as compared to that of the sample at 20.17. Obviously, the sampled respondents were slightly younger than the population (t = −7.2, p < .001). The race makeup was comparable between the sample and the population. For White, it was 84.4% vs. 79.03%, African Americans 8.9% vs.16.32%; Asian Americans 5.35 vs. 3.05%, and Hispanics 1.3% vs. 1.9%. It seems respondents in the sample were more likely to be white (χ² = 26.2, df = 3, p < .001).

²In this study, the Web in which political attack ads appear refers to the Web as a medium or channel for distributing advertising massages for a candidate.