This study explores the effects of televised presidential debate viewing on young citizens’ candidate evaluations and normative democratic attitudes, including political cynicism and political information efficacy. Findings revealed that debate viewing decreases young citizens’ political cynicism and strengthens political information efficacy. Longitudinal analysis tracked young citizens’ democratic attitudes from pre-debate to post-election, finding that one’s political information efficacy intensifies throughout the course of the ongoing campaign, but debates’ immediate effect of reducing political cynicism is not sustained as the campaign progresses.
AnsolabehereS.IyengarS. (1995). Going negative: How political advertisements shrink and polarize the electorate. New York: The Free Press.
2.
BenoitW. L.HansenG. J.VerserR. M. (2003). A meta-analysis of the effects of viewing U.S. presidential debates. Communication Monographs, 70, 335–350. doi:10.1080/0363775032000179133
3.
BenoitW. L.McKinneyM. S.HolbertR. L. (2001). Beyond learning and persona: Extending the scope of presidential debate effects. Communication Monographs, 68, 259–273. doi:1080/03637750128060
4.
CampbellA.GurinG.MillerW. E. (1954). The voter decides. Evanston, IL: Row Peterson & Co.
5.
ChaffeeS. H. (1978). Presidential debates: Are they helpful to voters?Communication Monographs, 45, 330–346. doi:10.1080/03637757809375978
6.
Delli CarpiniM. X. (2004). Mediating democratic engagement: The impact of communications on citizens’ involvement in political and civic life. In KaidL. L. (Ed.), Handbook of political communication research (pp. 395–434). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
7.
Delli CarpiniM. X.KeeterS. (1996). What Americans know about politics and why it matters. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
8.
HoustonJ. B.HawthorneJ.SpialekM. L.GreenwoodM.McKinneyM. S. (2013). Tweeting during presidential debates: Effect on candidate evaluations and debate attitudes. Argumentation and Advocacy, 49, 301–311.
9.
KaidL. L.McKinneyM. S.TedescoJ. C. (2000). Civic dialogue in the 1996 presidential campaign: Candidate, media, and public voices. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.
10.
KaidL. L.McKinneyM. S.TedescoJ. C. (2007). Political information efficacy and young voters. American Behavioral Scientist, 50, 1093–1111. doi:1177/0002764207300040
11.
KatzE.FeldmanJ. J. (1962). The debates in the light of research: A survey of surveys. In KrausS. (Ed.), The great debates: Kennedy vs. Nixon, 1960 (pp. 173–223). Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
12.
LanoueD. J.SchrottP. R. (1991). The joint press conference: The history, impact, and prospects of American presidential debates. New York: Greenwood Press.
13.
LemertJ. B. (1993). Do televised presidential debates help inform voters?Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 37, 83–94. doi:10.1080/08838159309364205
14.
LemertJ. B.ElliottW. R.NestvoldK. J.RarickG. R. (1983). Effects of viewing a presidential primary debate: An experiment. Communication Research, 10, 155–173. doi:10.1177/009365083010002001
McKinneyM. S. (2012). Communication and political participation: Engaging young citizens in political life. In GoodboyA. K.ShultzK. (Eds.), Introduction to communication studies: Translating scholarship into meaningful practice (pp. 365–373). Dubuque, IA: Kendall Hunt.
19.
McKinneyM. S.BanwartM. C. (2005). Rocking the youth vote through debate: Examining the effects of a citizen versus journalist controlled debate on civic engagement. Journalism Studies, 6, 153–163. doi:10.1080/14616700500057171
20.
McKinneyM. S.CarlinD. B. (2004). Political campaign debates. In KaidL. L. (Ed.), Handbook of political communication research (pp. 203–234). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
21.
McKinneyM. S.ChattopadhyayS. (2007). Political engagement through debates: Young citizens’ reactions to the 2004 presidential debates. American Behavioral Scientist, 50, 1169–1182. doi:10.1177/0002764207300050
22.
McKinneyM. S.DudashE. A.HodgkinsonG. (2003). Viewer reactions to the 2000 presidential debates: Learning issue and image information. In KaidL. L.TedescoJ. C.BystromD. G.McKinneyM. S. (Eds.), The millennium election: Communication in the 2000 campaign (pp. 43–58). Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
23.
McKinneyM. S.GullyD. (2011). Bridging the generations: Ageism, John McCain and the 2008 presidential debates. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Communication Association, San Francisco, CA.
24.
McKinneyM. S.HoustonJ. B.HawthorneJ. (2014). Social watching a 2012 Republican presidential primary debate. American Behavioral Scientist, 58(4), 556–573. doi:10.1177/0002764213506211.
25.
McKinneyM. S.RillL. A. (2009). Not your parents’ presidential debates: Examining the effects of the CNN/YouTube debates on young citizens’ civic engagement. Communication Studies, 60, 392–406. doi:10.1080/10510970903110001
26.
McKinneyM. S.RillL. A.GullyD. (2011). Civic engagement through presidential debates: Young citizens’ attitudes of political engagement throughout the 2008 election. In McKinneyM. S.BanwartM. C. (Eds.), Communication in the 2008 U.S. election: Digital natives elect a president (pp. 121–141). New York: Peter Lang.
27.
McKinneyM. S.RillL. A.WatsonR. G. (2011). Who framed Sarah Palin? Viewer reactions to the 2008 vice presidential debate. American Behavioral Scientist, 55, 212–231. doi:10.1177/0002764210392158
28.
McKinneyM. S.WarnerB. R. (2013). Do presidential debates matter? Examining a decade of campaign debate effects. Argumentation and Advocacy, 49, 238–258.
29.
McLeodJ. M.BybeeC. R.DurallJ. A. (1979). Equivalence of informed participation: The 1976 presidential debates as a source of influence. In WilhoitG. C.deBockH. (Eds.), Mass communication review yearbook 2 (pp. 469–493). Beverly Hills, CA: SAGE.
30.
MillerA. H.MacKuenM. (1979). Informing the electorate: A national study. In KrausS. (Ed.), The great debates: Carter vs. Ford, 1976 (pp. 269–297). Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
31.
PattersonT. E. (2002). The vanishing voter: Public involvement in an age of uncertainty. New York: Knopf.
32.
PfauM. (2003). The changing nature of presidential debate influence in the new age of mass media communication. Paper presented at the 9th Annual Conference on Presidential Rhetoric, Texas A&M University.
33.
PopkinS. L. (1991). The reasoning voter: Communication and persuasion in presidential campaigns. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
34.
RaineL.SmithA.SchlozmanK. L.BradyH.VerbaS. (2012). Social media and political engagement. Washington, DC: Pew Research Center.
35.
RillL. A.CardielC. (2013). Funny, ha-ha: The impact of user generated political satire on political attitudes. American Behavioral Scientist, 57(12), 1738–1756. doi:10.1177/0002764213489016.
36.
RosenstoneS. J.KinderD. R.MillerW. E. (1997). American National Election Study 1996: Pre- and post-election survey [computer file]. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan, Center for Political Studies (producer), and Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research (distributor).
37.
SearsD. O.ChaffeeS. H. (1979). Uses and effects of the 1976 debates: An overview of empirical studies. In KrausS. (Ed.), The great debates: Carter vs. Ford, 1976 (pp. 223–261). Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
38.
SmithA.BoylesJ. L. (2012). The rise of the “connected viewer.”Washington, DC: Pew Research Center.
39.
SweetserK. D.KaidL. L. (2008). Stealth soapboxes: Political information efficacy, cynicism and uses of celebrity weblogs among readers. New Media & Society, 10, 67–91. doi:10.1177/1461444807085322
40.
ThorsonE.HawthorneJ.SwasyA.McKinneyM. S. (2013). The effects of “social watching” the 2012 presidential debates. Manuscript submitted for publication.
41.
WaldK.LupferM. (1978). The presidential debate as a civics lesson. Public Opinion Quarterly, 42, 342–353. doi:10.1086/268457
ZhuJ.MilavskyJ. R.BiswasR. (1994). Do televised debates affect image perception more than issue knowledge? A study of the first 1992 presidential debate. Human Communication Research, 20, 302–333. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2958.1994.tb00325.x
