Candidate Appraisal and Human Nature: Man and Superman in the 1984 Election

• Published in: Political psychology Vol. 11; no. 3; pp. 459 - 484
• Main Authors: Sullivan, John L., Aldrich, John H., Borgida, Eugene, Rahn, Wendy
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Oxford Plenum Publishing Corporation 01-09-1990; Cambridge, MA Blackwell; Transaction Periodicals Consortium
• Subjects: Behavior. Attitude; Biological and medical sciences; Campaign strategies; ELECTION; Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology; Human nature; Incumbents; Overman; POLITICAL CAMPAIGNS; Political candidates; Political elections; POLITICAL EVALUATION; Politicians; Presidential elections; Psychology. Psychoanalysis. Psychiatry; Psychology. Psychophysiology; RONALD REAGAN; Social psychology; Voting; Human; Policy; Choice; Social perception; Attitude; Theory; Inquiry
• ISSN: 0162-895X; 1467-9221
• DOI: 10.2307/3791660

In this paper, we develop a theory about how people assess political candidates in order to arrive at a basic like or dislike judgment for each candidate. We argue that in deciding whether to like or dislike candidates, voters emphasize both the candidates' personal qualities and the unique nature of the campaign environment. Since initial impressions of presidential candidates are formed before voters make direct comparisons for the general election, voters may compare their images of candidates with their intuitive ideas about "human nature" or "most people." In arriving at candidate evaluations, then, voters might rely on a "superman" standard, expecting their political leaders to rise above human nature. Alternatively, they might rely on an "everyman" standard, expecting their leaders to be as representative or typical as possible. Using data from the 1984 presidential election, we find that although the superman model fits the data better, the everyman model has some impact, particularly on feelings toward Reagan. This may explain, in part, the often-noted bias in favor of the incumbent.