Replication Data for: Pounding the Pavement: Field Experimental Evidence from a Persuasion Canvassing Study on Campaign Finance Reform Attitudes

Does providing arguments for or against campaign finance reform during an in-person conversation alter attitudes towards campaign finance regulation or increase the salience of campaign finance reform? We examine these questions with a pre-registered field experiment combining canvassing conducted following the 2016 election and a 3-wave panel study to measure outcomes. We recruited a panel of registered voters in Broome County, NY to participate in a series of online surveys. Those who responded to the baseline survey were randomly assigned to be canvassed at their homes with a gently supportive or oppositional message about campaign finance regulations, or a placebo about hydraulic fracturing. Two waves of follow-up surveys – the first 10-15 days after canvassing and the second 4-7 months later – were used to gauge the effect of canvassing on the direction of attitudes on campaign financing and the salience of the issue. We find anti-reform canvassing may have produced a backlash, strengthening voters’ support for reforming campaign finance. We find clear evidence that counter-attitudinal canvassing increased the salience of the issue both in the short- and long-term. These results about salience suggest that canvassing may evoke policy threat and boost interest in the role of money in politics.