Journal of the European Economic Association · 2025 · Georgy Egorov、Sergei Guriev、Maxim Mironov、Ekaterina Zhuravskaya
中文摘要
政治竞选活动为何常常产生出人意料的结果？我们通过分别估计竞选活动对目标选民的直接效应以及对同一社会环境中其他选民的间接效应来回答这一问题。在阿根廷2023年总统选举期间，我们与当地一家非政府组织合作，随机分发传单，传单中载有专家对局外人候选人哈维尔·米莱若干提案可能后果的评估。利用阿根廷独特的分选区选举结果报告制度，我们发现，该竞选活动如预期般降低了直接受处理选民对米莱的支持，但在受处理选区内未受处理的选民中却反而提高了对他的支持，从而产生了适得其反、对米莱而言净为正面的效应。一项预注册的重复研究证实了这两个符号相反的效应。借助理论分析和一项调查实验，我们表明，少数不相信该竞选信息的选民更有动力与同伴讨论此事，并说服他们支持米莱。当竞选活动批评局外人候选人时，这种动员效应似乎尤其可能出现。我们的结果凸显出，针对反精英候选人的竞选活动可能会无意中动员选民转而支持这些候选人。
Abstract
Abstract Why do political campaigns so often yield unexpected results? We address this question by separately estimating the direct effect of a campaign on targeted voters and the indirect effect on others in the same social environment. Partnering with a local NGO during Argentina’s 2023 presidential election, we randomized the distribution of leaflets providing an expert assessment of the likely consequences of certain proposals by the outsider candidate Javier Milei. Exploiting Argentina’s unique sub-precinct election reporting system, we show that the campaign reduced Milei’s support among directly treated voters, as expected, but increased his support among untreated voters in treated precincts, producing a backfiring, net-positive effect for Milei. A pre-registered replication confirmed these opposite-signed effects. Using theory and a survey experiment, we show that the minority of voters who disbelieved the campaign were more motivated to discuss it with peers, convincing them to support Milei. This mobilization effect appears especially likely when campaigns criticize outsider candidates. Our results highlight how campaigns aimed at anti-elite candidates can unintentionally mobilize support for them.