For decades the conventional wisdom has been that voters hate negative campaigning. Some have even argued that it can be a deterrent to voting at all. "The Positive Case for Negative Campaigning "shows that negativity in campaigns is not only necessary, but is also often viewed as acceptable by voters themselves. The most comprehensive treatment to date of negativity in campaigns, Mattes and Redlawsk s book attacks the subject using a host of different approaches, including formal models, survey research, and laboratory experiments. The ability of candidates to go on the attack and to explicitly focus on information that otherwise would not be revealed, provides voters with more and fuller information than they would have otherwise had. At the same time, the authors find that voters can and do accept negativity as a legitimate part of the political environment. Much of their supposed dislike can be explained by how survey questions are worded. Voters responses to negativity vary greatly and can be better explained by the content and believability of the ads than simply by whether the ads are negative. All told, Mattes and Redlawsk make an original and compelling case that voters are not as negative about negativity as previously believed, as well as for its positive benefits in political campaigning."

Essays from the Stoic philosopher instructing how to find happiness in a world full of adversity. Lucius Annaeus Seneca (4 BCE–65 CE) was a Roman Stoic philosopher, dramatist, statesman, and advisor to the emperor Nero, all during the Silver Age of Latin literature. The Complete Works of Lucius Annaeus Seneca is a fresh and compelling series of new English-language translations of his works in eight accessible volumes. Edited by Elizabeth Asmis, Shadi Bartsch, and Martha C. Nussbaum, this engaging collection helps restore Seneca—whose works have been highly praised by modern authors from Desiderius Erasmus to Ralph Waldo Emerson—to his rightful place among the classical writers most widely studied in the humanities. Hardship and Happiness collects a range of essays intended to instruct, from consolations—works that offer comfort to someone who has suffered a personal loss—to pieces on how to achieve happiness or tranquility in the face of a difficult world. Expertly translated, the essays will be read and used by undergraduate philosophy students and experienced scholars alike. Praise for Hardship and Happiness “[The Complete Works of Lucius Annaeus Seneca] brings together many preeminent anglophone scholars of Seneca as editors and translators and succeeds in its aim to reach a wider audience through readable, modern English translations. . . . The overall high quality of the translations and notes make this volume (and its respective series) highly desirable for scholars and libraries alike.” —Classical Journal “A significant improvement over what has been available in English of the previous century. . . . The translations presented here admirably achieve the aim set out by the series’ editors: ‘to be faithful to the Latin while reading idiomatically in English.’ . . . Hardship and Happiness is a handsome volume, beautifully conceived and executed.” —Review of Metaphysics “We owe a debt of gratitude to Chicago for this one-volume selection of essays from long ago, which still have the power to stimulate our minds today.” —Classics for All

Going Dirty is a history of negative campaigning in American politics and an examination of how candidates and political consultants have employed this often-controversial technique. The book includes case studies on notable races throughout the television era in which new negative campaign strategies were introduced, or existing tactics were refined and amplified upon.

Negative campaigning is frequently denounced, but it is not well understood. Who conducts negative campaigns? Do they work? What is their effect on voter turnout and attitudes toward government? Just in time for an assessment of election 2004, two distinguished political scientists bring us a sophisticated analysis of negative campaigns for the Senate from 1992 to 2002. The results of their study are surprising and challenge conventional wisdom: negative campaigning has dominated relatively few elections over the past dozen years, there is little evidence that it has had a deleterious effect on our political system, and it is not a particularly effective campaign strategy. These analyses bring novel empirical techniques to the study of basic normative questions of democratic theory and practice.

Turn on the television or sign in to social media during election season and chances are you’ll see plenty of negative campaigning. For decades, conventional wisdom has held that Americans hate negativity in political advertising, and some have even argued that its pervasiveness in recent seasons has helped to drive down voter turnout. Arguing against this commonly held view, Kyle Mattes and David P. Redlawsk show not only that some negativity is accepted by voters as part of the political process, but that negative advertising is necessary to convey valuable information that would not otherwise be revealed. The most comprehensive treatment of negative campaigning to date, The Positive Case for Negative Campaigning uses models, surveys, and experiments to show that much of the seeming dislike of negative campaigning can be explained by the way survey questions have been worded. By failing to distinguish between baseless and credible attacks, surveys fail to capture differences in voters’ receptivity. Voters’ responses, the authors argue, vary greatly and can be better explained by the content and believability of the ads than by whether the ads are negative. Mattes and Redlawsk continue on to establish how voters make use of negative information and why it is necessary. Many voters are politically naïve and unlikely to make inferences about candidates’ positions or traits, so the ability of candidates to go on the attack and focus explicitly on information that would not otherwise be available is crucial to voter education.

It is common knowledge that televised political ads are meant to appeal to voters' emotions, yet little is known about how or if these tactics actually work. Ted Brader's innovative book is the first scientific study to examine the effects that these emotional appeals in political advertising have on voter decision-making. At the heart of this book are ingenious experiments, conducted by Brader during an election, with truly eye-opening results that upset conventional wisdom. They show, for example, that simply changing the music or imagery of ads while retaining the same text provokes completely different responses. He reveals that politically informed citizens are more easily manipulated by emotional appeals than less-involved citizens and that positive "enthusiasm ads" are in fact more polarizing than negative "fear ads." Black-and-white video images are ten times more likely to signal an appeal to fear or anger than one of enthusiasm or pride, and the emotional appeal triumphs over the logical appeal in nearly three-quarters of all political ads. Brader backs up these surprising findings with an unprecedented survey of emotional appeals in contemporary political campaigns. Politicians do set out to campaign for the hearts and minds of voters, and, for better or for worse, it is primarily through hearts that minds are won. Campaigning for Hearts and Minds will be indispensable for anyone wishing to understand how American politics is influenced by advertising today.

This interesting and timely volume explores the effectiveness of negative campaign ads, whether or not negative campaigning has value, the effectiveness of fact-checking, and what fuels negative campaigning. Includes primary and secondary sources from a variety of perspectives; eyewitnesses, scientific journals, government officials, and many others.