Populist leaders often promote themselves as the true “authentic” leaders of the people, in contrast to professional, experienced politicians. Donald Trump’s presidential campaign in the United States, for example, was often characterized as authentic: spontaneous, no-frills, and direct, using twitter artfully to this end. Pundits and journalists attributed to this style a major role in winning him the Republican Party nomination and electoral victory on November 2016. But what is authenticity, scientifically speaking? The political science literature on candidate traits and voting behavior lacks a systematic study of authenticity appeals and their effects on voters’ evaluations and support for candidates. Moreover, the literature on candidate traits does not typically take into account the vast changes in the political communication landscape, and most notably the rise of social networking sites, which facilitates populist appeals. This paper addresses these gaps. First, we offer a three-dimensional theoretical model of candidate authenticity (integrity; folksiness; and interactivity). We then test empirically the effect of these authenticity dimensions on favorability, feeling closeness to and intended support for a candidate. We report on an experiment, in which we systematically varied the authenticity appeal and ideological direction of a Facebook page of a fictitious candidate. Participants (voting age adults, N = 200) were randomly assigned to read one of six Facebook page versions, and then rated authenticity and their candidate support. Data analyses show some authenticity dimensions affected greater support for the candidate than others. Moreover, whereas one dimension of authenticity (integrity) polarized left- and right-wing voters' support, another dimension of authenticity (interactivity) equalized support for the candidate from both left and right. Implications of these findings and future directions are discussed in conclusion.
