Negative voting in congressional elections : does representation really matter?

In this dissertation I explore the phenomenon of negativity in the context of midterm congressional elections. Negativity is defined as the tendency of individuals to weigh negative bits of information (dislikes about a candidate) more heavily than equally extreme and equally likely positive bits of information (likes about a candidate). More importantly, within the broader framework of the quality of representation as perceived by the individual voter, I try to identify the type of incumbent who is more likely to be a victim of negative voting. I argue that those members of the House who are perceived by their constituents as responsive to the needs and desires of the district will be less likely to be damaged by unfavorable evaluations on Election Day. Furthermore, I try to identify some of the political characteristics that make a voter more likely to utilize the negative heuristic. Finally, I make an attempt to explore the implications of negativity in congressional elections for democratic theory (i.e., discuss the value of electoral outcomes for input in policy decisions when citizens' votes increasingly reflect disaffection with congressional candidates rather than approval) and to suggest some implications for campaign strategies that stem from the findings of this study. Survey data from the last five midterm congressional elections provided by the CPS American National Election Studies (1978, 1982, 1986, 1990, and 1994) formed the basis for this analysis.