Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

A Functional Analysis of 2008 General Election Debates

A Functional Analysis of 2008 General Election Debates This study employed content analysis based on Functional Theory to investigate the three general election debates featuring Democratic nominee Barack Obama and Republican nominee John McCain in the 2008 presidential campaign. These debates were mostly positive (58% acclaims) with numerous attacks (35%) and some defenses or refutations of attacks (7%). There was no significant difference in the two candidates' use of acclaims and attach; however, Obama worked to link McCain with unpopular President Bush and a much higher percentage of Obama's discussion of past deeds were attacks (86%), compared with McCain (56%). The candidates stressed policy (70%) more than character (30%), with Democrat Barack Obama stressing policy more, and character less, than Republican John McCain. In this debate, both general goals and ideals were employed more often as the basis for acclaims than for attacks, consistent with previous research. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Argumentation and Advocacy Taylor & Francis

A Functional Analysis of 2008 General Election Debates

Benoit, William; Rill, Leslie A.
Argumentation and Advocacy , Volume 50 (1): 13 – Jun 1, 2013
Download PDF

A Functional Analysis of 2008 General Election Debates

Abstract

This study employed content analysis based on Functional Theory to investigate the three general election debates featuring Democratic nominee Barack Obama and Republican nominee John McCain in the 2008 presidential campaign. These debates were mostly positive (58% acclaims) with numerous attacks (35%) and some defenses or refutations of attacks (7%). There was no significant difference in the two candidates' use of acclaims and attach; however, Obama worked to link McCain with unpopular...
Loading next page...
 
/lp/taylor-francis/a-functional-analysis-of-2008-general-election-debates-9OGFps4dan
Publisher
Taylor & Francis
Copyright
© 2013 Taylor and Francis Group, LLC
ISSN
2576-8476
eISSN
1051-1431
DOI
10.1080/00028533.2013.11821808
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

This study employed content analysis based on Functional Theory to investigate the three general election debates featuring Democratic nominee Barack Obama and Republican nominee John McCain in the 2008 presidential campaign. These debates were mostly positive (58% acclaims) with numerous attacks (35%) and some defenses or refutations of attacks (7%). There was no significant difference in the two candidates' use of acclaims and attach; however, Obama worked to link McCain with unpopular President Bush and a much higher percentage of Obama's discussion of past deeds were attacks (86%), compared with McCain (56%). The candidates stressed policy (70%) more than character (30%), with Democrat Barack Obama stressing policy more, and character less, than Republican John McCain. In this debate, both general goals and ideals were employed more often as the basis for acclaims than for attacks, consistent with previous research.

Journal

Argumentation and Advocacy – Taylor & Francis

Published: Jun 1, 2013

Keywords: 2008 general election; debates; Obama; McCain; functions; topics

References

  • A gendered influence in campaign debates? Analysis of mixed-gender United States senate and gubernatorial debates
  • Presidential campaign discourse as a causal factor in election outcome
  • Political party affiliation and presidential campaign discourse
  • A functional analysis of the 1988 Bush-Dukakis presidential debates
  • A functional analysis of 2008 general election presidential TV spots
  • Function of the great debates: Acclaims, attacks, and defenses in the 1960 presidential debates
  • A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales
  • The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data
  • The use of evidence in presidential debates: A study of evidence levels and types from 1960–1988
  • Negative political advertising: Some empirical findings
  • White paper on televised political campaign debates
  • Unifying or polarizing? Short-term effects and post-debate consequences of different rhetorical strategies in televised debates
  • There they go again: The use of humor in presidential debates 1960–2008
  • Popular, and over at last
  • Voter perception of mud-slinging in political communication