Negating the Effects of Fear Appeals in Election Campaigns

Candidates in elections are frequently called dangerous by detractors who seek to induce fear among voters. If these charges are made by credible sources, the attacked candidate will probably lose votes. Our study examines this issue plus two countering responses to such attacks: deny the validity of the charges and/or counterattack against the opponent. Each option is discussed in light of fear research, and an experiment is reported that supports the effectiveness of both denial and counterattack. Namely, fear-inducing charges by a credible source reduced the attacked candidate's vote. When a second credible source denied that the charges were valid or levied a counterattack against the alternate, the attacked candidate's vote loss was fully offset. When denial was combined with counterattack, the attacked candidate's vote increased above even its preattack level.