Quarterly Journal of Political Science > Vol 4 > Issue 3

Candidate Faces and Election Outcomes: Is the Face–Vote Correlation Caused by Candidate Selection?

Matthew D. Atkinson, Department of Political Science, University of California, USA, matthewa@ucla.edu , Ryan D. Enos, Department of Political Science, University of California, USA, renos@ucla.edu , Seth J. Hill, Department of Political Science, University of California, USA, sjhill@ucla.edu
 
Suggested Citation
Matthew D. Atkinson, Ryan D. Enos and Seth J. Hill (2009), "Candidate Faces and Election Outcomes: Is the Face–Vote Correlation Caused by Candidate Selection?", Quarterly Journal of Political Science: Vol. 4: No. 3, pp 229-249. http://dx.doi.org/10.1561/100.00008062

Publication Date: 20 Oct 2009
© 2009 M. D. Atkinson, R. D. Enos and S. J. Hill
 
Subjects
Political psychology,  Electoral behavior
 

Share

Download article
In this article:
Candidate Faces and Elections 
Measuring Facial Competence 
The Selection of Candidate Faces to Election Contests 
Individual Voter Response to Candidate Faces 
Challenger Effects by Contest 
Discussion 
Appendix 
References 

Abstract

We estimate the effect of candidate appearance on vote choice in congressional elections using an original survey instrument. Based on estimates of the facial competence of 972 congressional candidates, we show that in more competitive races the out-party tends to run candidates with higher quality faces. We estimate the direct effect of face on vote choice when controlling for the competitiveness of the contest and for individual partisanship. Combining survey data with our facial quality scores and a measure of contest competitiveness, we find a face quality effect for Senate challengers of about 4 points for independent voters and 1–3 points for partisans. While we estimate face effects that could potentially matter in close elections, we find that the challenging candidate's face is never the difference between a challenger and incumbent victory in all 99 Senate elections in our study.

DOI:10.1561/100.00008062

Erratum

Quarterly Journal of Political Science, Volume 5, Issue 1 10.1561/100.00080621