Political Campaigns and the Knowledge-Gap Hypothesis

Abstract

The knowledge-gap hypothesis suggests that a sudden infusion of information into a social setting serves to increase, rather than decrease, the gap in knowledge between high- and low-status voters. Political campaigns represent an especially appropriate setting to test this hypothesis, because of (1) the increased information that generally characterizes campaigns and (2) the important political consequences to lower status voters if the hypothesis is correct. A two-wave panel survey during the 1978 New Hampshire gubernatorial campaign finds that on one issue the knowledge gap increased during the campaign, while on another, perhaps less complex issue, the gap remained constant. These differences are hypothesized to be a function of different diffusion curves of the high- and low-status voters, with implications for the varying lengths of time states allow for campaigns between the primary and general elections.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 94 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.