For several decades candidate images studies have generally conceptualized and operationalized candidate images as source credibility traits or personae of candidates. Candidate issue positions have been minimized in such research and left out of the image construct. Thus, candidate images were treated as clusters of persona impressions only, thus implying that issue perceptions are unimportant in voter decision-making. A dichotomy emerged which split candidate image as persona impressions from candidate impressions, treating these as separate and independent determinants of vote.
Later research indicated that candidate image content was unknown and some researchers argued that candidate images are most likely inclusive of both issue and persona impressions. The dichotomy persisted, however, because of the assumption that voters process candidate trait perceptions more than candidate issue positions perceptions as well as the belief that trait perceptions and issue perceptions are orthogonal.
The key assumptions which underpin the issue-persona dichotomy were tested in this study as hypotheses. Using panel data from a random sample of community members and employing correlational and cross-lag correlational analyses, the researchers found that these hypotheses are not empirically supported.
The data falsify the issue-persona dichotomy assumptions and add credence to a more cognitive view of candidate images. Such a view conceptualizes candidate images as integrated structures of issue perceptions, persona perceptions, and whatever other kinds of perceptions are important to particular voters in particular elections.
Dr. Hacker is Associate Professor and Dr. Zakahi is Professor of Communication Studies at New Mexico State University. Mr. Giles is Senior Political Project Manager at Worthlin Worldwide.