Framing in Political Evaluations. An Empirical Study on the Role of Positive and Negative Comparisons in Affect and Preference Construction

Abstract The study focuses on framing which can be defined as a particular way of presenting information that affects how the message is understood and accepted. More precisely, in our research we investigate how comparisons to the concepts of an ideal politician (positive framing) and a bad politician (negative framing) influence affective evaluation and preference for a political candidate. The results of an experimental study showed that negative framing led to a higher affective evaluation and voting intention compared to positive framing. Furthermore, the juxtaposition of the candidate with the concept of a bad politician resulted in an increase in the preference for the candidate (compared to the initial measurement). The findings support the negativity effect and add to the discussion on comparative and negative advertising.