Perceived negativity in British general election communications

British parties – and their candidates – frequently engage in the use of negative messaging. While previous studies shed light on the frequency and source of such messages, we know less about how negative messages are received. In this research note, we present the results of a pilot survey designed investigate perceptions of the different types of messages that political elites use to discuss their opponents. Our preliminary results suggest that there is significant variation in the perceived negativity of messages, with messages referencing specific individuals being more likely to be perceived to be negative.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Electoral Studies
Published
2024-09-16
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.electstud.2024.102863
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Social Media and Politics
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.96
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Perceived negativity in British general election communications

Caitlin Milazzo, John Barry Ryan
1 citations
Electoral Studies
Social Media and Politics
0.96
article

Perceived negativity in British general election communications

Caitlin Milazzo, John Barry Ryan
article en
1 citations

Abstract

British parties – and their candidates – frequently engage in the use of negative messaging. While previous studies shed light on the frequency and source of such messages, we know less about how negative messages are received. In this research note, we present the results of a pilot survey designed investigate perceptions of the different types of messages that political elites use to discuss their opponents. Our preliminary results suggest that there is significant variation in the perceived negativity of messages, with messages referencing specific individuals being more likely to be perceived to be negative.

Electoral StudiesVol. 92
University of Nottingham (GB), University of Michigan (US), Michigan United (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 21%
Social Media and Politics
0.96
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.