Measuring and Mapping the Use of Data-Driven Campaigning by Party Organizations

• In Event: Political Communication Virtual Poster Session
  In Virtual Poster Session: Political Communication Virtual Poster Session I

Abstract

This paper proposes a more explicit empirical definition and quantitative measurement of an emergent mode of electioneering – data-driven campaigning (DDC) – that is then applied and ‘road-tested’ in two major party systems, Germany and the U.S. following the ‘most different systems’ logic. The key aim of the paper is to contribute to the development of a more systematic and replicable measurement of campaign change that can be used in comparative research, and to derive a deeper understanding of the factors that drive innovation and adoption of these new techniques at the party and systemic level. To do this, the paper is divided into four main sections.

Part I undertakes a systematic review of the literature on the concept of DDC in order to arrive at shared or ‘essentialist’ definition of the practice. In part II this conceptual definition is operationalised by deriving observable indicators that measure the extent to which parties or campaigns are deploying DDC practices. Potential indicators include the use of large scale integrated databases, analytics software and message testing. These indicators will be converted into binary and ordinal variables and form the basis for development of a multi-dimensional DDC index that can be applied to individual parties. The resultant scores can then be used to measure and compare adoption of the new mode of campaigning within and across party systems. The operationalisation and index construction draws on prior experience of the authors in the design and application of a party professionalization campaign index (Gibson and Rommele, 2000, 2009). Part III of the paper will attempt to validate the index by applying it in two divergent party systems – the U.S. and Germany. Scores will be assigned to parties based on a combination of elite interview data and desk based research. The results will be evaluated in terms of the extent to which they are successful in capturing variance across parties and party systems and how far they have face validity. Where do we see highest and lowest rates of adoption among parties? How far does size, ideology, structure, electoral performance or party goal matter in explaining the results? Given we have a MDS design is there a marked difference in scores at the country or party system level? The final section of the paper will interpret and contextualise the findings to reflect on what they tell us about the drivers and barriers to the uptake of DDC at the organizational and systemic level, and more generally on the value of the new index for cross-national research. In taking this more reductionist empirical approach to measuring DDC we inevitably lose nuance and theoretical richness. However, by making its features explicit and quantifiable it becomes possible to benchmark and measure variance in campaign style and practice within and across party systems, and also change over time. This is arguably an area of party activity that has to date proven resistant to efforts at empirical precision.

Authors

• Esmeralda V. Bon, University of Manchester

• Rachel K. Gibson, University of Manchester

• Andrea Roemmele, Hertie School of Governance