1

Copy Test
David Vitter
Copy Test Report
Fighting to Defend Louisiana Ad
2016 Louisiana Senate Campaign
Morgan Arnold
MC 3510 Political Communication Research
Professor York
December 13, 2013


2
Copy Test
David Vitter
Copy Test Report
Fighting to Defend Louisiana Ad
2016 Louisiana Senate Campaign

Campaign Context
According to a recent Southern Media and Opinion Research poll, more than 58% of
voters reported positive approval ratings on David Vitters job performance. Vitter has
gained widespread support throughout Louisiana as he has proved to be a durable
politician, holding elected office for more than two decades as a state and federal lawmaker.
Easily winning re-election to a second U.S. Senate term in 2010 despite a prostitution
scandal, Vitter proves to be popular among Louisianans. He has displayed his loyalty and
compassion for the state by defending Louisiana jobs that depend on oil and gas drilling and
by fighting to reform the Army Corps of Engineers to guarantee better protection for
hurricanes and flooding. His extensive work as a ranking member in the United States
Senate Environment and Public Works Committee paid off, as he was successful in passing
the Water Resources Development Act, giving $4-5 billion to Louisiana for comprehensive
coastal protection and restoration programs.
Heading into the 2016 Louisiana Senatorial race against Democrat Kip Holden, it is
crucial that Vitter maintains the support of Louisiana conservatives. Gathering $12 million
in fundraising during the 2010 U.S. Senate election indicates that Vitter had a well-
established support system. It is imperative that Vitters campaign messages highlight his
conservative values that align with his supporters. These messages should emphasize his
proposed amendment to the Obama stimulus bill to cut $50 billion in wasteful spending, his
fight to bring jobs back to the Gulf Coast, and his dedication to restoring Louisianas
coastline.
Since Vitter is the incumbent and is polling ahead of Holden by a 59% to 41%
margin among Louisianans, it is extremely important that campaign messages remain
positive, focusing on Vitters accomplishments as senator (Ridout & Franz, 2011). His
campaign messages should portray him as competent, warm, and experienced. Messages
should highlight his loyalty to the state of Louisiana and his dedication to conservative


3
values, such as ruling back on government spending. As the incumbent, his campaign
should emphasize the need for continuity, not change, in the effort to restore Louisianas
coastline following the BP Oil spill. Democrat Kip Holden has gained experience and
recognition as the mayor of Baton Rouge, but Vitter has continuously proved to be
successful at winning elections.
Ad Development
Considering the campaign context and Braders (2006) experimental analyses, I
developed a candidate profile and ad storyboard highlighting positive components of
Vitters record as a senator and reinforcing the conservative values that he stands by. Brader
(2006) suggests that positive ads have stronger effects when they feature implicit enthusiasm
cues such as warm, patriotic images and uplifting music. These cues increase campaign
interest and the probability of voting in a general election campaign among individuals who
already support Vitter. Enthusiasm cues motivate campaign participation and activate
existing partisan loyalties.
Since Vitters approval rating is high and he is leading Holden in early polling, I
decided to create a positive ad with enthusiasm cues based on his success as a senator and
the conservative values in which he fights for. This ad begins with a static video clip of
Vitter taking a stance on government spending, as he declares that we need to act on the
spending and debt crisis immediately. This shows him in a professional and competent light.
The ad continues on to show his fight against wasteful government spending by proposing
an amendment to the Obama stimulus bill to cut $50 billion. Images of Vitter interacting
with elderly citizens and veterans are used to portray him as warm, friendly, and engaged.
The ad also incorporates a breathtaking image of a Louisiana waterway and a video clip of
Vitter introducing the Water Resources Development Act to congress, which displays his
competence yet again. According to Shanks and Miller (1990), candidate personality trait
impressions have been found to significantly influence voter choice. Research has shown
competence to be the most important dimension in predicting voter choice (Shanks and
Miller 1990). Given that information, it is essential to portray Vitter in a competent manor.
In addition, I used an upbeat, motivational song as the ads musical score, which cues
enthusiasm.
Because Vitter is the incumbent and leading in the polls, I decided to avoid a
negative advertising message since negative ads can have backlash (Ridout & Franz, 2011).
Vitter needs to remain ahead in polling and maintain his supportive base of conservative
voters. Since public opinion of Vitter has been reported as positive, the goal of the campaign
ad isnt to persuade voters, its to keep the current level of supporters.
Based on extant research and theory, I would hypothesize the following effects of
exposure to a positive ad containing enthusiasm cues:


4
H1: In a comparison of individuals, participants will feel more positive toward David Vitter
after viewing the ad than before viewing the ad. (Attitudes)
H2: In a comparison of individuals, participants will be more likely to rate David Vitter as
competent after viewing the ad than before viewing the ad. (Traits)
H3: In a comparison of individuals, participants will be more likely to vote for David Vitter
after viewing the ad than before viewing the ad. (Voting)
H4: Among ad viewers, Republicans will be more likely to vote for David Vitter after viewing
the ad than will Democrats, who will be less likely to vote for Vitter. (Voting)
Method
Sample. To test the effectiveness of the positive ad containing enthusiasm cues, I
embedded my campaign ad Fighting to Defend Louisiana in a Qualtrics online survey.
The copy test used a non-random, convenience sampling technique that consisted of
Louisiana friends, family and acquaintances all potential voters (n = 31). Data collection
ran from November 1, 2013 to November 18, 2013.
Measures. A variety of survey measures designed to seize variation in respondents
attitudes toward Vitter, perceptions of Vitters traits, and voting intentions were included. I
also included a standard block of sociodemographic variables (sex, age, etc.) in the survey
along with the respondents party affiliation.
The variable called attitudes toward Vitter was assessed using an adapted version of the
American National Election Studys (ANESs) 100-point feeling thermometer item.
Reported scores of 0 translate to negative attitudes toward Vitter. Reported scores of 100
indicate that respondents hold positive attitudes toward Vitter. Scores between 0 and 100
represent the varying attitudes toward Vitter.
Perception of candidate traits was measured with one item. This item asked
respondents if they felt Vitter possessed the trait of competence. For each item, respondents
could answer on a seven-point Likert scale from 0 (strongly disagree) to 6 (strongly agree).
Other traits items were used but were excluded from the analysis because they did not
directly relate to the hypotheses stated above.
Vote intentions was measured using a 100-point scale item that asked respondents to
report the likelihood of voting for Vitter in the next election. Respondents could answer
from 0 to 100, with high scores indicating a greater likelihood of voting for Vitter.



5
Procedure & Analysis. Survey participants were asked a set of questions before and
after viewing the Vitter Fighting to Defend Louisiana ad. In this sense, the study engages
a quasi-survey-experimental design without random assignment or a control group.
Participants were first asked questions involving their attitudes, trait perceptions, and
voting intentions toward Vitter. Following this first set of questions, participants then
viewed the Vitter ad. They were then given an identical set of questions to re-answer after
they were exposed to the ad. Respondents continued on to answer a few sociodemographic
questions, were thanked for their participation and dismissed.
After the survey closed, I analyzed the data using two analytical procedures: means
comparison analysis (MCA) and controlled means comparison analysis. These analytical
procedures aided me in comparing attitudes, trait perceptions, and vote intentions before
and after participants viewed the Vitter advertisement. Making the assumption that no
irrelevant variables altered the effects, the study design allowed me to test causal effects of
the ad on Louisiana voters.
Results
Attitudes. I used a means comparison analysis to determine the effects of viewing the
ad on attitudes toward Vitter. The results from this analysis are recorded in Table 1.1. As
displayed in Table 1.1, attitudes toward Vitter were higher before viewing the ad (M =
58.52, sd = 26.44) than after viewing the ad (M = 56.00, sd = 27.13). These results do not
provide support for H1, which predicted that participants would have a more positive
attitude toward Vitter after viewing the ad. It appears the ad had the opposite effect and
lowered positive feelings toward Vitter.

!"#$% '('

Effect of viewing Positive vittei Au on Attituues Towaiu vittei, By Paity IB

)*+%: Cell entiies iepiesent mean vittei attituue scoies on a 1uu-point feeling theimometei, with u coueu as
negative attituues anu 1uu coueu as positive attituues.


,
-

.
/
%
0
/
1
2


3%4*56"+

7%89#$/5"1

:1-%8%1-%1+

;+<%6 ="6+>

!*+"$

=6%?!%@+

49.uu
(S)


7u.Su
(18)

4u.17
(6)

29.Su
(2)

S8.S2
(S1)
=*@+?!%@+ S4.8u
(S)
67.61
(18)
47.SS
(6)
Su.Su
(2)
S6.uu
(S1)




6

Trait Perceptions. Trait perceptions were measured using an ordinal outcome a
seven-point Likert scale. This is usually considered a categorical measure but since the
sample size was relatively small with only 31 participants, and dispersion across the variable
was likely small, I treated this variable as pseudo-interval level. In other words, I treated
the variable as a quasi-continuous variable. I used a means comparison analysis to test ad
effects on the competence candidate trait dependent variable.
Table 1.2 shows the effect of viewing the ad on the competent candidate trait
outcome variable. Before viewing the ad, respondents had a favorable mean Vitter
competence score (M = 4.10, sd = 1.42). However, viewing the ad had a clear effect on
Vitters competence ratings (M = 4.29, sd = 1.51). These results suggest that the ad was
successful in making Vitter appear competent with regard to passing legislation and
defending conservative values. H2 is supported as the results display an increase in
participants perception of Vitters competence.


Vote Intentions. Using a controlled means comparison analysis, I examined ad effects
on whether or not participants would vote for Vitter before and after viewing the positive ad.
The results from the controlled MCA are recorded in Table 1.3. This table displays the
direct effect of viewing the ad on intentions to vote for Vitter in 2016. Viewing the Vitter ad
had an overall positive effect on Vitter vote intentions. Before watching the ad, participants
were less likely to report that they would vote for Vitter (M = 57.71, sd = 32.86) than after
viewing the ad (M = 58.77, sd = 31.04). This positive increase in Vitter vote intentions
!"#$% '()

Effect of viewing Positive vittei Au on Tiait Peiception "Competent", By Paity IB

*+,%: Cell entiies iepiesent mean vittei attituue scoies on a seven-point Likeit scale, fiom "Stiongly
Bisagiee" vittei exhibits a tiait (coueu u) to "Stiongly Agiee" (coueu 6).


-
.

/
0
%
1
0
2
3


4%5+67",

8%9:#$06"2

;2.%9%2.%2,

<,=%7 >"7,?

!+,"$

>7%@!%A,

2.8u
(S)


4.S6
(18)

4.67
(6)

1.Su
(2)

4.1u
(S1)
>+A,@!%A, S.2u
(S)
4.89
(18)
4.Su
(6)
1.uu
(2)
4.29
(S1)




7
supports H3, which states that participants will be more likely to vote for Vitter after ad
exposure.

As displayed in Table 1.3, Republicans were more likely to vote for Vitter after
watching the ad than before. However, Democrats were less likely to vote for Vitter after
viewing the ad than before. These results support H4, which predicted that ad exposure
would increase Vitter voting intentions among Republicans and decrease Vitter voting
intentions among Democrats. There was an interactive effect of party identification on the
relationship between viewing the ad and likelihood of voting for Vitter. This interactive
effect is illustrated in Figure 1.3. Aligned with Braders (2006) findings, these results indicate
that exposure to a positive advertisement with enthusiasm cues reinforce current candidate
preferences among compatible partisans (Republicans) and contrasting partisans
(Democrats).







!"#$% '()

Effect of "Fighting to Befenu Louisiana" Au on Piobability of voting foi vittei, By Paity IB

*+,%: Cell entiies iepiesent mean scoies on a 1uu-point sliuing scale, fiom "veiy 0nlikely to vote foi vittei"
(u) to "veiy Likely to vote foi vittei" (1uu).


-
.

/
0
%
1
0
2
3


4%5+67",

8%9:#$06"2

;2.%9%2.%2,

<,=%7 >"7,?

!+,"$

>7%@!%A,

S4.6u
(S)


7u.u6
(18)

48.8S
(6)

S1.uu
(2)

S7.71
(S1)
>+A,@!%A, 2S.6u
(S)
74.11
(18)
49.67
(6)
S1.uu
(2)
S8.77
(S1)




8
Figure 1.1- Effect of Viewing Positive Vitter Ad on Attitudes Toward Vitter, By Party ID

Figure 1.2- Effect of Viewing Positive Vitter Ad on Trait Perception Competent, By Party
ID

!
#!
$!
%!
&!
'!
(!
)!
*!
+!
#!!
,-./0.12 ,312/0.12
4.536-721
8.9:;<=67>1
?>@.9.>@.>21
A2B.- ,7-2C
D
E
2
:
@
.
1

0
3
F
7
-
@

G
=
H
.
-

0
1
2
3
4
3
6
re-1esL osL-1esL
uemocraLs
8epubllcans
lndependenLs
CLher arLy
1
r
a
l
L

e
r
c
e
p
u
o
n
:

C
o
m
p
e
L
e
n
c
e



9
Figure 1.3- Effect of Fighting to Defend Louisiana Ad on Probability of Voting for Vitter,
By Party ID

Conclusion
After analyzing an initial copy test of the Fighting to Defend Louisiana Vitter ad,
results show that the ad is mostly effective. However, data shows that the ad was not
effective at improving participant attitudes toward Vitter, which rejects H1. Ad exposure
resulted in less positive attitudes toward Vitter. The ad proved to be effective in increasing
perceptions of Vitters competence trait, supporting H2. The ad improved perceptions of
Vitter as a competent candidate. This suggests that the ad makes viewers feel Vitter is
qualified.
H3 and H4 made predictions about vote intentions. Ad exposure had a positive direct
effect on vote intentions. H3 is supported as results show an overall increase in vote
intentions for Vitter among participants. Although there was an overall increase, there was
an interactive effect with party ID. Republicans were more likely to vote for Vitter after
viewing the ad than before, and Democrats were less likely to vote for Vitter after ad
exposure than before. These results support H4, which predicted that ad exposure would
increase vote intentions among Republicans and decrease vote intentions among
Democrats. This suggests the ad primes partisan evaluations, reinforcing loyalties among
Republicans and Democrats (Brader, 2006).
!
#!
$!
%!
&!
'!
(!
)!
*!
+!
#!!
,-./0.12 ,312/0.12
4.536-721
8.9:;<=67>1
?>@.9.>@.>21
A2B.- ,7-2C
D
3
3
E
>
F

?
>
2
.
>
E
3
>
1

0
3
G
7
-
@

D
=
H
.
-









10
Although no hypothesis regarding Independents, specifically, was established, the
Vitter ad proved to be very effective among these participants. Ad exposure led to a
percentage increase of more than seven points regarding positive attitudes toward Vitter.
Vote intentions among Independents also increased after viewing the ad. However, the ad
was not effective in improving the competent trait perception of Vitter among Independents.
Recommendations: Research on the conditional effect of timing on ad effectiveness
shows that ads are more effective when they are run early in a campaign. However, there is
potential for ads run late in a campaign to have a bigger impact because intensity in
campaigns rise as Election Day gets closer (e.g., Ridout & Franz, 2011). With this given
research, it is my suggestion that the Fighting to Defend Louisiana ad runs early and
frequently to maintain Vitters lead in the polls. I also recommend that the ad be run again
frequently toward the end of the campaign, as Election Day nears. Running the ad toward
the end of the campaign will aim to reinforce partisan loyalty (Brader, 2006), ensuring that
Vitter holds on to his Republican supporters.
Because Vitter is both the incumbent and ahead in polls, there is no need to produce
a negative ad that attacks opponent Kip Holden. The positive ad message combined with
enthusiasm cues proves to be effective in reinforcing vote intentions for Vitter among his
supporters. The positive ad is also effective in increasing Independents views of Vitter,
which will be very beneficial, as Election Day gets closer.
Additionally, the ad effectively portrays Vitter as a competent leader, which is a trait
the campaign is focused on highlighting. Research shows that in some cases candidate
personality trait impressions can influence voter choice to a greater degree than issues
(Shanks and Miller, 1990). The results of running the positive Fighting to Defend
Louisiana ad appears to show Vitter in a competent manor, which will be key during this
campaign. The most crucial finding from this preliminary copy test is that the ad increases
vote intentions among Republicans and Independents. My strategic interpretation of this
finding is that we should proceed with caution in hope of persuading more Independents to
vote for Vitter. We need to hold on to the support from Republicans and continue to gain
support from Independents. The ad proved to be the least effective among Democrats, as ad
exposure decreased their positive attitudes and vote intentions toward Vitter. The data from
this copy tests suggests that Democrats will be the hardest to gain support from. We will
need to be delicate and cautious in regards to the ad if we hope to win over any support
from Democrats.
Timetable: Moving forward with the copy test process, we need to generate a series of
positive Vitter ads with enthusiasm cues. We will then test the effects of each ad on the
desired outcomes. This process will allow us to conduct and replicate research, which will
provide us with the information to determine if Fighting to Defend Louisiana is the most


11
effective ad our campaign could air. Changes to improve our existing ad will help make it
more effective. I recommend that we add more images and video clips that portray Vitter as
warm and friendly. This portrayal can be derived from adding images of Vitter interacting
with his family. Additionally, I suggest adding more pictures that show Vitter relating to
average voters. We can further increase viewers competent trait perception of Vitter by
adding more information on his plans for job creation.
The last step in the copy test process is to conduct a field test of the most effective
version of the ad in a small Louisiana county. This field test should use a mixed-method,
experimental and survey design. If the ad proves to be effective in a real-world setting, we
should begin airing the ad statewide starting Jan. 1, 2016.
.
















12
References
Brader, T. (2006). Campaigning for hearts and minds: How emotional appeals in political ads work.
University of Chicago Press.

Ridout, T. N., & Franz, M. M. (2011). The persuasive power of campaign advertising. Temple
University Press.

Shanks, J.M., & Miller, W.E. (1990). Policy direction and performance evaluation:
Complementary explanations of the Reagan Election. British Journal of Political Science.