Revisiting name recognition and candidate support: Experimental tests of the mere exposure hypothesis

Often lacking adequate information to guide their votes, voters may be susceptible to subtle psychological influences, including name recognition. For decades, scholars have found that voters are more likely to cast ballots for candidates whose names they recognize. These arguments imply that exposure to little-known candidates’ names increases electoral support. But research has seldom demonstrated a causal effect consistent with this “mere exposure” hypothesis, particularly under real-world conditions. We conduct three sets of experiments exposing subjects to the names of challengers in a range of electoral contexts across the United States. Results yield little support for the hypothesis that exposure increases electoral support. As name recognition may be insufficient without party labels, we also conduct experiments providing the candidates’ party affiliations, again finding little evidence of an effect. These findings cast doubt on the hypothesis that candidates, particularly challengers, who merely make their names known will thereby win more votes.