Presidential Campaigns and Presidential Accountability

Appendix B: Estimated Models for Chapter 4

165 Appendix B Estimated Models for Chapter 4 The full-ordered probit models used to generate the figures presented in chapter 4 are reported below. Note that party identification was centered at the midpoint, so 0 represents Independents, –3 represents strong Republicans, and 3 represents strong Democrats. Issue priority was also centered at the midpoint, so 0 represents a respondent who gives the issue a “medium” priority, 2 represents a “very high” priority, and –2 represents a respondent who said the issue was not a priority at all. The estimates on the interaction between issue priority and party indicate whether partisans who prioritize an issue highly are more likely to hear their party’s candidate talking about the issue (projection). The estimates for candidate emphasis represent the effect of increasing attention to an issue on the probability that an Independent who places a medium priority on the issue accurately hears the candidate talking about the issue. The estimates on the interaction between candidate emphasis and party indicate whether campaign emphasis has a stronger or weaker effect on the probability that a partisan accurately recognizes the emphasis (selective exposure). None of these interactions achieve conventional levels of significance. The model can be summarized as (Equation 1) Hear Cand Issueim = β0 + β1 Cand Issue Emphasism + β2 Issue Priorityi + β3 Partyi + (β4 Issue Priorityi· Partyi ) + (β5 Issue Emphasism· Partyi ) + Xj βj + ui where i indexes individual respondents, m denotes the information environment, designated by a respondent’s media market and time of interview, and Xj includes the individual-level control variables. Table B.1 Hearing Education Talk Gore Bush Coefficient SE Coefficient SE Candidate Ad Emphasis 0.045** 0.019 0.022* 0.012 Issue Priority 0.056 0.040 0.030 0.040 Party ID 0.087*** 0.032 –0.124*** 0.034 Issue Priority × Party ID 0.009 0.018 0.021 0.019 Ad Emphasis × Party ID 0.004*** 0.008 0.004 0.005 Political Awareness 0.571*** 0.046 0.540*** 0.045 Education 0.027*** 0.032 –0.055* 0.032 Age 0.007 0.002 0.007*** 0.002 Female –0.029*** 0.067 0.080 0.067 Minority 0.340* 0.089 0.163* 0.088 Days to Election 0.001 0.000 0.000 0.000 T1 –0.897 0.116 –1.135 0.125 T2 –0.410 0.114 –0.493 0.122 T3 0.576 0.114 0.651 0.122 T4 1.351 0.117 1.338 0.125 N 1065 1067 Log Likelihood –1520.01 –1502.24 Model chi2 256.629 214.042 ***p < .01, **p < .05, *p < .10. Table B.2 Hearing Health Care Talk Gore Bush Coefficient SE Coefficient SE Candidate Ad Emphasis 0.023 0.017 0.005 0.013 Issue Priority 0.014 0.038 0.022 0.038 Party ID 0.019 0.028 –0.039 0.029 Issue Priority × Party ID 0.058*** 0.017 –0.018 0.017 Ad Emphasis × Party ID 0.005 0.007 –0.002 0.006 Political Awareness 0.494*** 0.045 0.363*** 0.045 Education 0.045 0.032 –0.072** 0.032 Age 0.009*** 0.002 0.010*** 0.002 Female –0.058 0.067 0.109 0.067 Minority 0.397*** 0.089 0.273*** 0.088 Days to Election 0.001*** 0.000 0.000 0.000 T1 –0.786 0.116 –0.892 0.115 T2 –0.277 0.115 –0.136 0.113 T3 0.628 0.115 1.042 0.115 T4 1.443 0.119 1.776 0.124 N 1059 1061 Log Likelihood –1531.69 –1461 Model chi2 244.152 124.615 Notes: ***p < .01, **p < .05, *p < .10. Table B.3 Hearing Social Security Talk Gore Bush Coefficient SE Coefficient SE Candidate Ad Emphasis 0.061** 0.024 0.044*** 0.014 Issue Priority 0.078* 0.042 –0.019 0.041 Party ID 0.013 0.031 –0.087*** 0.032 Issue Priority × Party ID 0.048** 0.019 –0.018 0.019 Ad Emphasis × Party ID –0.007 0.011 0.002 0.006 Political Awareness 0.586*** 0.046 0.422*** 0.045 Education 0.042 0.032 –0.027 0.032 Age 0.010*** 0.002 0.013*** 0.002 Female –0.016 0.068 0.102 0.067 Minority 0.358*** 0.089 0.195** 0.089 Days to Election 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.000 T1 –0.845 0.110 –0.831 0.119 T2 –0.291 0.108 –0.098 0.116 T3 0.656 0.109 1.025 0.119 T4 1.408 0.113 1.848 0.128 N 1062 1062 Log Likelihood –1520.29 –1470.18 Model chi2 282.021 206.419 Notes: ***p < .01, **p < .05, *p < .10. Table B.4 Hearing Tax Talk Gore Bush Coefficient SE Coefficient SE Candidate Ad Emphasis 0.054** 0.022 0.014 0.012 Issue Priority –0.013 0.034 –0.052 0.034 Party ID 0.033 0.023 0.029 0.025 Issue Priority × Party ID 0.060*** 0.016 –0.089*** 0.016 Ad Emphasis × Party ID 0.004 0.009 –0.002 0.005 Political Awareness 0.322*** 0.045 0.560*** 0.046 Education –0.070** 0.032 0.020 0.032 Age 0.007*** 0.002 0.007*** 0.002 Female 0.178*** 0.067 –0.117* 0.067 Minority 0.367*** 0.089 0.208** 0.089 Days to Election 0.001 0.000 0.000 0.000 T1 –0.526 0.106 –1.138 0.109 T2 0.190 0.105 –0.502 0.106 T3 1.277 0.110 0.486 0.106 T4 1.935 0.118 1.251 0.109 N 1064 1068 Log Likelihood –1489.3 –1527.64 Model chi2 137.582 269.378 Notes: ***p < .01, **p < .05, *p < .10. ...