Messaging Styles

This project speaks to multiple strands of political communication research, including elite messaging strategies and manifesto analysis (Adams 2001; Budge et al. 2001; Laver et al. 2003), audit experiments on political responsiveness (Bischof et al. 2021), and studies of linguistic complexity and framing effects in campaign messages (Canovan 1999; Moffitt & Tormey 2014).

While much work examines what political elites say and how voters interpret policy content, less is known about the interplay between elite communication style—complexity, framing, source cues—and elite responsiveness to constituent signals. Few studies have combined text‐as‐data analyses of elite messaging with field‐experimental audits of how those messages shape elite behavior.

How we addressed it

• Textual analysis: Developed and validated the LIX readability index (Björnsson 1968) on 175 party manifestos from Austria and Germany (1945–2013).
• Survey experiments: Preregistered two‑wave vignette and conjoint experiments in Germany (N = 5,800) testing how simple versus sophisticated framing affects political knowledge and candidate perceptions.
• Audit experiments: Designed confederate‐based field experiments that minimize deception to measure MPs’ responsiveness to constituent messages of varying style.
• Elite messaging preprint: Extended our framework to analyze elite communication styles and their downstream effects on voter engagement and perceptions in a recent OSF preprint.

Key Findings

1. Populist simplicity: Populist parties systematically use less complex language—shorter words, shorter sentences—than mainstream competitors.
2. Enhanced placement accuracy: Voters locate parties more accurately on the left–right spectrum when campaign messages are simpler.
3. Comprehension boost: Simple messages significantly improve citizens’ understanding of policy positions.
4. Heuristic effects: Simple framing leads citizens to perceive speakers as more “of the people” rather than part of an elite.
5. Unresponsive elites: British MPs do adapt their style and ton to voter demands.

Implications

For practice: Political elites and strategists should calibrate their communication style—balancing clarity and nuance—and consider how message complexity influences both voter comprehension and elite responsiveness. Field audits reveal practical and ethical considerations for testing elite behavior in real settings.

For social science: Combining text‐as‐data methods with audit experiments opens new avenues for studying political messaging. Future work should integrate linguistic analysis, survey experiments, and field audits to capture the full lifecycle of elite communication and its effects on democratic processes.

Publications

• Bischof, D., Cheng‐Matsuno, V., Cohen, G., et al. (2025). “Elite Communication Styles and Voter Engagement.” OSF Preprint.
• Bischof, D., Cohen, G., Cohen, S., Foos, F., Kuhn, P. M., Nanou, K., Visalvanich, N., & Vivyan, N. (2021). “Advantages, Challenges and Limitations of Audit Experiments with Constituents.” Political Studies Review.
• Bischof, D., & Senninger, R. (2025). “How Simple Messages Affect Voters’ Knowledge and Their Perceptions of Politicians.” Journal of Politics.
• Bischof, D., & Senninger, R. (2018). “Simple politics for the people? Complexity in campaign messages and political knowledge.” European Journal of Political Research.

Funding

• British Academy/Leverhulme Trust Small Research Grant with Florian Foos & Kyriaki Nanou: € 11 000 [£ 9 870] (2017–2019)