Search

We examine the role that emotion plays in understanding people's reactions to the presidential candidates during two of the three general election debates between Republican Donald Trump and Democrat Hillary Clinton. To measure the impact of emotions on people's attitudes toward the candidates, we run studies at two large public universities. We are able to measure changes in attitudes and responses to the candidates after exposure to each debate. In addition, we explore real-time reaction to the candidates by employing facial expression software to assess people's emotional responses during the debate. We show that people who watched the first and third presidential debate are much more likely to change their evaluations of the presidential rivals, compared to people who did not view these debates. We also show that people's displays of emotion are related to their willingness to change their views of the candidates. For example, when people are displaying anger and joy, they are less likely to change their evaluations of the presidential candidates during the course of the debate. Furthermore, we find that when people show fear and sadness, their views of the candidates become less polarized over the length of the debates. These results show how different emotions influence the candidate evaluation process. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We demonstrate that the news media's "spin" or analysis following the last presidential debate in 2004 influenced citizens' evaluations of the candidates. The media's "instant analyses" in the twenty-four hours following the debate was decidedly one-sided, favoring President Bush more than Senator Kerry. We show that the news media's spin persuaded potential voters to alter their attitudes regarding the competing candidates. We rely on a multimethodological approach, including an experiment with a quasi-experimental component, a public opinion survey, and a content analysis. To examine the media's spin, we conducted a content analysis of news coverage on television, on the Internet, and in newspapers for the twenty-four hours following the final 2004 presidential debate. Second, to examine how citizens reacted to the media's coverage, we relied on a representative public opinion survey conducted immediately following the debate. In addition, we conducted an experiment where certain individuals were exposed to the debate, while others were not, and we tracked these subjects over the course of a week to determine the stability of their attitudes in the midst of intense media coverage. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Presidential debates are much more than just 90-minute events. They are followed by media analysis and interpretation, including interviews with experts, the discussion of instant polls, the replaying of highlights, and the commentary of candidates' spokespeople. It is a complicated mix to say the least. We seek to examine these competing influences for the final 2004 presidential debate with a unique and powerful design: a controlled experiment, a public opinion survey, and a content analysis of the debate and the news media's “instant analysis” immediately following the debate. Our findings, for example, suggest that citizens were influenced by the arguments presented directly by the candidates during the debate as well as by the media's instant analyses of the candidates' debate performance. Because we are able to take a closer look at this complicated campaign event, we are able to tell a more compelling and nuanced story about the effects of debates than previously told. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]