3
month after their contest, despite continued exposure to advertising, some gave incorrect
answers. I interpreted this as evidence suggesting that motivation exerts an influence on
learning. It may also play a role in remembering. Perhaps some respondents knew the
answer at one time but when asked after their contest, failed to recall it. This paper
investigates that possibility further. I rely on panel data that allows me to examine both
learning and remembering or forgetting in the same individual over time and in response
to changing conditions. Studying the same individuals over time allows me to establish
the link between advertisements and learning more strongly and examine whether and
under what conditions people continue to remember information after its usefulness
wears out. The panel data also enables me to more precisely determine whether incorrect
answers given after a respondent’s contest should be attributed to a failure to learn the
information in the first place or a failure to recall it after its major usefulness ended.
Plan of the Paper
I begin by discussing insights on learning, recall, and forgetting drawn from the
fields of psychology and cognitive science, especially as applied to advertising. I then
examine the role of advertising, news, and personal characteristics on learning about
candidates through using the National Annenberg National Election Survey’s pre-post
Super Tuesday panel combined with advertising data supplied by Kenneth Goldstein of
the Wisconsin Advertising Project. I compare respondents’ answers across time and
predict remembering, forgetting, learning, and failing to learn using multinomial logit
models. My findings show that people learn about candidate backgrounds from
campaign advertising. They also suggest that advertising, especially at very high levels,
may outweigh low motivation and lead to increased learning.
Convention