Audience Recall of Issues and Image in Congressional Debates

By Hullett, Craig R.; Louden, Allan D. | Argumentation and Advocacy, Spring 1998 | Go to article overview
Save to active project

Audience Recall of Issues and Image in Congressional Debates


Hullett, Craig R., Louden, Allan D., Argumentation and Advocacy


His rhetoric is as empty as a walnut that a squirrel has condemned. Response of Audience Member to 5th District Congressional Debate, Winston-Salem, NC

A focal point of the research and corresponding argument surrounding political debates concerns what the voters learn from the viewing experience. In academic circles and among practitioners, the controversy regarding the worth of political debates remains intense. Although large numbers of voters watch this increasingly common campaign event, the value and nature of citizen learning remain uncertain(1). A general consensus seems to have emerged among academics that voters "learn" from viewing political debates by attending to issue messages from the candidates and elaborating on their images of the candidates. Many existent models, however, seek to demonstrate that voters remember either issue or image information. A few theorists acknowledge that voters may integrate issue and image judgments, but little has been done to discern the nature of combined information acquisition.

Unfortunately, most of the literature examining political debates regards image-based information with disdain. Authors generally hold that issues are the "right-stuff" of decision making, the pertinent reasons associated with proper democratic participation, whereas image is devalued as extraneous character judgments (e.g., Jamieson & Birdsell, 1988; Zhu, Milavsky, & Biswas, 1994). Some inconclusive research suggests that there may be differences in receptivity to candidates' statements according to voter allegiance, but to date little research has tested whether image perceptions indicate a lack of knowledge about the candidates' statements. Also, although voters' perceptions of the candidates are often reliably sorted into the image/issue dichotomy, there is a shortage of inquiry regarding whether these categories are as clearly opposed in voters' minds as they are represented in academic discussion. In this study, we sought to discover: 1) whether voters' party affiliations were related to their overall learning from the candidates; 2) whether voters' tendencies toward image or issue perceptions were related to their overall learning from the candidates; and 3) how image and issue are interrelated in the voters' minds.

Learning

Some argue that learning from debates reflects the value that the voters place on the issues discussed. Judd and Kulik (1980) claim that people, in general, are more likely to recall arguments they have heard when their views about those arguments are highly polarized toward either agreement or disagreement with the issues. This heightened learning stems from the fact that people are typically more receptive to information they perceive as important (Judd & Kulik, 1980).

Current research conflicts concerning whether viewers of debates are entirely open to the information presented by both candidates (Hellweg, Pfau, & Brydon, 1992). Carter (1962) found that those who watched the Kennedy-Nixon debates similarly recalled the arguments presented by both their preferred and the opposing candidate. The only significant differences in recall of the two candidates' arguments occurred when the viewers either discounted the effectiveness of both candidates' arguments or were inattentive to the debates (Carter, 1962). Hagner and Rieselbach (1978) reported that some viewers of the Carter-Ford debates were receptive to both candidates' arguments; twenty percent of the viewers converted their allegiance from one candidate to the other. Those who converted, however, typically had weaker voting convictions than those whose votes followed their previous preferences. Others have found evidence of selective and greater recall for preferred candidate's arguments (Bothwell & Brigham, 1993). Still, other contextual variables (e.g., how informed viewers are) have been advanced to explain audience reception to debate information (Hellweg et al.

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Sign up now for a free, 1-day trial and receive full access to:

  • Questia's entire collection
  • Automatic bibliography creation
  • More helpful research tools like notes, citations, and highlights
  • Ad-free environment

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
Loading One moment ...
Project items
Notes
Cite this article

Cited article

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

Cited article

Audience Recall of Issues and Image in Congressional Debates
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

While we understand printed pages are helpful to our users, this limitation is necessary to help protect our publishers' copyrighted material and prevent its unlawful distribution. We are sorry for any inconvenience.
Full screen

matching results for page

Cited passage

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

Cited passage

Welcome to the new Questia Reader

The Questia Reader has been updated to provide you with an even better online reading experience.  It is now 100% Responsive, which means you can read our books and articles on any sized device you wish.  All of your favorite tools like notes, highlights, and citations are still here, but the way you select text has been updated to be easier to use, especially on touchscreen devices.  Here's how:

1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
2. Click or tap the last word you want to select.

OK, got it!

Thanks for trying Questia!

Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

For full access in an ad-free environment, sign up now for a FREE, 1-day trial.

Already a member? Log in now.

Are you sure you want to delete this highlight?