Group Politics Unveiled: Examining Voters’ Reactions to Group-Based Appeals

What prompts voters to respond positively or negatively to the fulfillment of targeted pledges? While research on the reasons behind pledge fulfillment has expanded, understanding voters' reactions to pledge fulfillment remains understudied. Although initial evidence suggests that voters penalize governments for pledge breakage, knowledge about the conditions under which voters reward parties for their pledge performance is scarce. Recognizing the growing significance of group targeting in politics, this study explores citizens' responses to pledges targeting specific groups, such as parents or rural residents. We argue that citizens judge pledge performance as both an indicator of incumbents’ general reliability and in substantive terms, through the lens of the classic question of "Who gets what?". We hypothesize that the impact of pledge fulfillment on voters is more pronounced among those who belong to the group, identify with it, and/or perceive the group as deserving. To test this, we use data from a survey experiment (N=3,500) that will be fielded in early 2024 in Germany. The experiment simulates a hypothetical scenario where respondents are, first, confronted with a fictional campaign poster showing a pledge to support one out of three social groups (treatment) or a general pledge (control). Second, (non)fulfillment information (randomly assigned) is conveyed through a media article. Dependent variables, including trust, performance evaluation, and voting behavior, are then measured in response. The findings carry significant implications for our understanding of promissory representation, group politics, and policy feedbacks.