The Individual-Level Effects of Presidential Conventions on Candidate Evaluations.

Our understanding of the impact of party conventions on opinion regarding presidential candidates is based largely on aggregate-level analysis. Extant individual-level investigation has been limited by the assumption that conventions are monolithic information events that exercise uniform effects. Using panel data, we show for the first time that conventions exercise two independent effects, which can counteract or reinforce each other depending on individual characteristics and information consumption. First, we demonstrate how exposure to speeches exercises a persuasive effect that benefits the convening candidate, even when partisanship is controlled. Second, we demonstrate how conventions exercise an atmospheric effect that activates general partisan bias. We find that observed postconvention changes are attributable to the combination of these separate but simultaneous effects. We also explore how individual partisanship conditions speech effects and find evidence that partisanship influences the decision to listen but is unlikely to influence the impact of a message already heard. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]