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 Televised U.S. Senate and Gubernatorial Campaign Debates

A Functional Analysis of Televised U.S. Senate and Gubernatorial Campaign Debates This study extended previous research on the Functional Theory of Political Campaign Discourse to investigate the nature of 21 U.S. Senate campaign debates and 15 gubernatorial debates from 1994 to 2006. Acclaims were more common than attacks or defenses in Senate (56%, 30%, 14%) and gubernatorial (68%, 30%, 2%) debates. Challengers attacked more and acclaimed less than incumbents in both groups of debates. Senate and gubernatorial incumbents used past deeds much more to acclaim than attack; challengers were prone to use past deeds to attack more than acclaim. There was no consistent effect of political party on functions of debates. The candidates focused more attention on policy than character in Senate (70%, 30%) and gubernatorial debates (73%, 27%). There was no difference in topics stressed by Democrats and Republicans, or incumbents and challengers, in either set of debates. These results are generally consistent with the findings from prior analyses of presidential debates. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Argumentation and Advocacy Taylor & Francis

A Functional Analysis of Televised U.S. Senate and Gubernatorial Campaign Debates

Download PDF

A Functional Analysis of Televised U.S. Senate and Gubernatorial Campaign Debates

Abstract

This study extended previous research on the Functional Theory of Political Campaign Discourse to investigate the nature of 21 U.S. Senate campaign debates and 15 gubernatorial debates from 1994 to 2006. Acclaims were more common than attacks or defenses in Senate (56%, 30%, 14%) and gubernatorial (68%, 30%, 2%) debates. Challengers attacked more and acclaimed less than incumbents in both groups of debates. Senate and gubernatorial incumbents used past deeds much more to acclaim than attack;...
Loading next page...
 
/lp/taylor-francis/a-functional-analysis-of-televised-u-s-senate-and-gubernatorial-zHBV0isGSZ
Publisher
Taylor & Francis
Copyright
© 2007 Taylor and Francis Group, LLC
ISSN
2576-8476
eISSN
1051-1431
DOI
10.1080/00028533.2007.11821679
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

This study extended previous research on the Functional Theory of Political Campaign Discourse to investigate the nature of 21 U.S. Senate campaign debates and 15 gubernatorial debates from 1994 to 2006. Acclaims were more common than attacks or defenses in Senate (56%, 30%, 14%) and gubernatorial (68%, 30%, 2%) debates. Challengers attacked more and acclaimed less than incumbents in both groups of debates. Senate and gubernatorial incumbents used past deeds much more to acclaim than attack; challengers were prone to use past deeds to attack more than acclaim. There was no consistent effect of political party on functions of debates. The candidates focused more attention on policy than character in Senate (70%, 30%) and gubernatorial debates (73%, 27%). There was no difference in topics stressed by Democrats and Republicans, or incumbents and challengers, in either set of debates. These results are generally consistent with the findings from prior analyses of presidential debates.

Journal

Argumentation and Advocacy – Taylor & Francis

Published: Sep 1, 2007

Keywords: Senate; gubernatorial; debates; functions; topics; incumbency; political party

References

  • 2004 Illinois U.S. Senate debates: Keyes versus Obama
  • The counterfeit debates
  • A gendered influence in campaign debates? Analysis of mixed-gender United States senate and gubernatorial debates
  • Campaign quality: Standards for evaluation, benchmarks for reform
  • A functional analysis of political advertising across media, 1998
  • Presidential campaign discourse as a causal factor in election outcome
  • Political party affiliation and presidential campaign discourse
  • Newspaper coverage of U.S. senate debates
  • Presidential debate questions and the public agenda
  • A meta-analysis of the effects of viewing U.S. presidential debates
  • On making progress in communication science
  • Capitalizing on contention: Issue agendas in U.S. Senate campaigns
  • A functional analysis of congressional television spots, 1986–2000
  • The effects of a televised gubernatorial debate
  • A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales
  • Political debates as televisual form
  • Reporters vs. undecided voters: An analysis of the questions asked during the 1992 presidential debates
  • Components of candidate images: Statistical analysis of the issue-persona dichotomy in the presidential campaign
  • Audience recall of issues and image in congressional debates
  • Thirty seconds or thirty minutes: What viewers leam from spot advertisements and candidate debates
  • The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data
  • Differences in impact between local and national televised political candidates' debates
  • Rumsfeld exits as Bush gets thumped: USA DECIDES 2006
  • Political campaign debates
  • Negative political advertising: Some empirical findings
  • Nonpresidential debates in America
  • Divided government: Is it all in the campaigns?
  • Criteria and format to optimize political debates: An analysis of South Dakota's election '80 series
  • Candidate image in a broadcast debate
  • White paper on televised political campaign debates
  • A perfect storm: A case study analysis of the defeat of Tom Dashle by John Thune in the 2004 South Dakota Senate race
  • Print media campaign coverage
  • Voter perception of mud-slinging in political communication
  • The incumbent and his challengers: The problem of adapting to prevailing conditions
  • Spectator politics and the revival of public argument