Use Of Persuasion And Priming Of An Idealistic World
1576 Words7 Pages
In an idealistic world it would be proper to say that all voters are extremely well-informed on all the nuances, platforms and information regarding elections and their vying candidates. However, voters do not determine the election’s outcome purely on the basis of the candidates’ merit, competence and convictions but rather there are other factors that play a role as well. Moreover, campaigns are stimulus fields that try to produce psychological mediators like persuading, priming or framing. However, before the voters can even receive any information, there is variance in the delivery of information in the first place. And this leads to knowledge gaps which in turn are reflected in the voters’ decisions which, for the most part, are based on their preconceived dispositions and as such, the information that they receive through various venues does not persuade them as much as it simply affirms their position.
Campaigns can function in two major ways in terms of giving voters information: persuasion and priming. Yet, it can be argued that rather than campaigns having the effect of persuasion, in which the campaigns change the voters’ minds, they have more of an impact through priming as they “shape public opinion by making certain issues or considerations salient to voters” to a certain extent. This in turn affects the “balance of partisan forces” . Furthermore, the priming role of debates and media campaigns not only changes the “opinion about the key consideration but