This study analyzes viewer assessments of Sara Palin’s vice presidential debate performance. Specifically, a national sample of debate viewers evaluated Palin and her vice presidential opponent Joe Biden on both image and issue measures before and after viewing their debate performance. We argue that the attendant media attention surrounding Palin before her debate performance—mostly negative in tone—framed Palin as unfit for office and created expectations that she would fail in her debate with Joe Biden. On several measures, however, Palin’s debate performance actually exceeded the low-bar of expectations that had been set, thus benefiting her in terms of viewers’ assessments of her debate performance.
Barnes, J.E. ( 2008, September 6). Sarah Palin as Alaska National Guard commander . Los Angeles Times [Electronic version]. Retrieved from http://articles.latimes.com/2008/sep/06/nation/na-guard6
2.
Barr, A. ( 2008, October 30). Study: Palin coverage negative. Politico. Retrieved from http://www.politico.com
3.
Beck, C.S. ( 1996). "I’ve got some points I’d like to make here": The achievement of social face through turn management during the 1992 vice presidential debate. Political Communication, 13, 165-180.
4.
Burgoon, M., & Miller, G.R. ( 1985). An expectancy interpretation of language and persuasion . In H. Giles & R. N. St. Clair (Eds.), Recent advances in language, communication, and social psychology (pp. 199-229). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
5.
Carlin, D.B., & Bicak, P.J. ( 1993). Toward a theory of vice presidential debate purposes: An analysis of the 1992 vice presidential debate. Argumentation and Advocacy, 30, 119-130.
6.
Davis, S., & Kronholz, J. ( 2008, August 29). Palin: From beauty pageant to popular governor . The Wall Street Journal [Electronic version]. Retrieved from http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2008/08/29/palinfrom-beauty-pageant-to-popular-governor/
7.
Dowd, M. ( 2009, January). What Tina wants. Vanity Fair [Electronic version]. Retrieved from http://www.vanityfair.com/magazine/2009/01/tina_fey200901
8.
Drew, D., & Weaver, D. ( 1991). Voter learning in the 1988 presidential election: Did the debates and the media matter? Journalism Quarterly, 68, 27-38.
9.
Entman, R.M. ( 1993). Framing: Toward clarification of a fractured paradigm . Journal of Communication, 43, 51-58.
10.
Hardy-Short, D. ( 1986). An insider’s view of the constraints affecting Geraldine Ferraro’s preparation for the 1984 presidential debates. Speaker and Gavel, 24, 8-22.
11.
Heflick, N.A., & Goldenberg, J.L. (2009). Objectifying Sarah Palin: Evidence that objectification causes women to be perceived as less competent and less fully human. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology , 45, 229-234.
12.
Holbrook, T.M. ( 1994). The behavioral consequences of vice-presidential debates: Does the undercard have any punch? American Politics Quarterly , 22, 469-482.
Hopkins, A. ( 2008, October 8). Palin beat expectations in debate, U.S. voters say. Reuters [Electronic version]. Retrieved from http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/N03359366.htm
15.
Huddy, L., & Terkildsen, N. (1993). Gender stereotypes and the perception of male and female candidates. American Journal of Political Science, 37, 119-147.
16.
Iyengar, S. ( 1991). Is anyone responsible: How television frames political issues. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
17.
Jurkowitz, M. ( 2008, September 9). Northern exposure: Palin dominates campaign coverage. Retrieved from http://pewresearch.org/pubs/944/sarah-palin-news-coverage
18.
Kaid, L.L., Postelnicu, M., Landreville, K., Yun, H.J., & LeGrange, A.G. (2007). The effects of political advertising on young voters. American Behavioral Scientist , 50, 1137-1151.
19.
Kay, J., & Borchers, T.A. (1994). "Children in a sandbox": Reaction to the vice presidential debate. In D. B. Carlin & M. S. McKinney (Eds.), The 1992 presidential debates in focus (pp. 99-108). New York, NY : Praeger.
20.
Lemert, J.B. ( 1993). Do televised presidential debates help inform voters ? Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media, 37, 83-94.
21.
Madden, M. ( 2008, October 3). Sarah Palin exceeds expectations-and still loses. Salon.com. Retrieved from http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2008/10/03/palin_biden/
22.
Malcolm, A. ( 2008, October 19). By golly, "Saturday Night Live" viewers prefer the real Sarah Palin. Los Angeles Times [Electronic version]. Retrieved from http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2008/10/sarah-palin-snl.html
23.
McKinney, M.S., Kaid, L.L., & Robertson, T.A. (2001). The front-runner, contenders, and also-rans: Effects of watching a 2000 Republican primary debate. American Behavioral Scientist, 44, 2232-2251.
24.
Pew Media Center’s Project for Excellence in Journalism. (2008). Winning the media campaign: Sarah Palin. Retrieved from http://www.journalism.org/node/13310
25.
Pfau, M. ( 1987). The influence of intraparty debates on candidate preference . Communication Research, 14, 687-697.
26.
Pollitt, K. ( 2008, September 24). Sarah Palin, affirmative action babe. The Nation [Electronic version]. Retrieved from http://www.thenation.com/doc/20081013/pollitt
27.
Reimink, T. ( 2008, October 17). Beyond Tina Fey and Sarah Palin: The best "Saturday Night Live" political impersonations. Grand Rapids Press [Electronic version]. Retrieved from http://www.mlive.com/politics
28.
Rosenberg, W.L., & Elliot, W.R. ( 1987). Effect of debate exposure on evaluation of 1984 vicepresidential candidates. Journalism Quarterly, 63, 55-64, 262.
29.
Rosenstone, S.J., Kinder, D.R., Miller, W.E., & the National Election Studies. ( 1997).
30.
American National Election Study 1996: Pre- and post-election survey [Computer file]. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan, Center for Political Studies (Producer) and Inter-University Consortium for Political and Social Research (Distributor).
31.
Scheufele, B.A. ( 1999). Framing as a theory of media effects. Journal of Communication, 49, 103-122.
32.
Tancer, B. ( 2008, September 2). Searching for Palin’s "hot photos." Time [Electronic version]. Retrieved from http://www.time.com/time/business/article/0,8599,1838041,00.html
33.
Tonn, M.B. ( 1994). Flirting with Perot: Voter ambivalence about the third candidate. In D. B. Carlin & M. S. McKinney (Eds.), The 1992 presidential debates in focus (pp. 109-123). Westport, CT: Praeger.
34.
Yawn, M., Ellsworth, K., Beatty, B., & Kahn, K.F. ( 1988). How a presidential primary debate changed attitudes of audience members. Political Behavior, 20, 155-181.
