Political scandal occurs when a government official engages in unethical or illegal behavior that is deemed inappropriate, resulting in a loss of public trust and increasing skepticism towards the political process. Scandals are often triggered by media coverage, and the ensuing responses from politicians have a profound impact on voter perceptions of corruption and political institutions.
In the United States, there are numerous examples of political scandals at both the state and local level. Many of these scandals involve bribery, trading in influence, or the use of government powers for corrupt purposes. Political corruption is generally considered a serious crime and a breach of ethical norms, but the definition of what constitutes corruption differs from country to country. For example, bribery is illegal in some places, while others consider it normal for members of parliament to accept gifts from corporations seeking to gain political favor.
In the past, researchers have sought to understand what factors contribute to a political scandal and its effects on voters. However, research on scandals is plagued by various limitations, including endogeneity concerns. In this article, we conduct a meta-analysis of seventy-eight studies to analyze the role of different independent variables in scandal effect studies and uncover five central moderators. Our findings indicate that scandals have a negative evaluative impact on politicians, but these effects are moderated by candidate characteristics, behaviors, prior attitudes, and context. The results of this study contribute to a more nuanced understanding of the phenomenon and suggest avenues for future research.