included rhetorical analysis, propaganda analysis, attitude change stud-
ies, voting studies, government and the news media, functional and sys-
tems analyses, technological changes, media technologies, campaign
techniques, and research techniques. ⁶ In a survey of the state of the
field in 1983, the same authors and Lynda Kaid found additional, more
specific areas of concerns such as the presidency, political polls, public
opinion, debates, and advertising. ⁷ Since the first study, they have also
noted a shift away from the rather strict behavioral approach.

A decade later, Dan Nimmo and David Swanson argued that "politi-
cal communication has developed some identity as a more or less dis-
tinct domain of scholarly work." ⁸ The scope and concerns of the area
have further expanded to include critical theories and cultural studies.
Although there is no precise definition, method, or disciplinary home
of the area of inquiry, its primary domain comprises the role, pro-
cesses, and effects of communication within the context of politics
broadly defined.

In 1985, the editors of Political Communication Yearbook: 1984
noted that "more things are happening in the study, teaching, and prac-
tice of political communication than can be captured within the space
limitations of the relatively few publications available." ⁹ In addition,
they argued that the backgrounds of "those involved in the field [are]
so varied and pluralist in outlook and approach, . . . it [is] a mistake
to adhere slavishly to any set format in shaping the content." ¹⁰ More
recently, Swanson and Nimmo have called for "ways of overcoming
the unhappy consequences of fragmentation within a framework that
respects, encourages, and benefits from diverse scholarly commitments,
agendas, and approaches." ¹¹

In agreement with these assessments of the area and with gentle
encouragement, in 1988 Praeger established the series entitled "Praeger
Studies in Political Communication." The series is open to all
qualitative and quantitative methodologies as well as contemporary and
historical studies. The key to characterizing the studies in the series
is the focus on communication variables or activities within a political
context or dimension. As of this writing, nearly forty volumes have
been published and numerous impressive works are forthcom-
ing. Scholars from the disciplines of communication, history,
journalism, political science, and sociology have participated in the
series.

I am, without shame or modesty, a fan of the series. The joy of serv-
ing as its editor is in participating in the dialogue of the field of political

-xii-