Challenging by cueing? An investigation of party and leader cueing effects across mainstream and challenger party voters

Abstract

The emergence of new challenger parties calls for a reassessment of the party-model of opinion formation by examining different sources of cues across types of voters and the conditions that make cueing more effective. Although new challenger parties may lack sufficient time to develop identification with groups and distinctive party reputations, they may still provide effective cues and reduce their competitive disadvantage in developing affective social identity ties. This article investigates this argument by assessing the impact of party and leader cues on voters from mainstream and challenger parties and examining how expressive partisanship (partisan social identities) and instrumental partisanship (party competence evaluations) moderate these effects. Utilizing data from a survey experiment conducted in Spain during a period of party system restructuring, we find similar cueing effects across party and leader cues when comparing voters of both mainstream and challenger parties. Additionally, contrary to our expectations, we observe that cueing effects for mainstream party voters combine expressive and instrumental reasoning, while those for new challenger party voters are driven by perceptions of party competence reputation only. These findings challenge the prevailing belief that familiarity and time enhance cueing effects. They also deviate from socio-psychological approaches that emphasize the emotional and identity components of partisanship in strengthening cueing effects.