Media coverage can influence how citizens think about their political leaders. This study explores how three types of media bias (visibility bias, tonality bias, and agenda bias) affect voter assessments of politicians’ traits. Bias effects should be stronger for political traits (such as competence) than for nonpolitical traits (such as likability). Biases may also interact in their effects: Specifically, visibility bias should moderate the impact of tonality bias. Combining media, party, and survey data through manual content analysis of newspaper coverage (N = 2,680) and party press releases (N = 1,794), as well as a three-wave voter survey (n = 927) during the 2013 Austrian election campaign, we find substantial effects of tonality bias and agenda bias on political trait perceptions. The effects are less clear for nonpolitical trait perceptions. Although visibility bias has no direct impact, there is evidence that it moderates effects of tonality bias on candidate perceptions.
AartsKeesBlaisAndréSchmittHermann. 2011. Political Leaders and Democratic Elections. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
2.
AnsolabehereStephenIyengarShanto. 1994. “Riding the Wave and Claiming Ownership over Issues: The Joint Effects of Advertising and News Coverage in Campaigns.” Public Opinion Quarterly58 (3): 335–57.
3.
BalmasMeitalSheaferTamir. 2010. “Candidate Image in Election Campaigns: Attribute Agenda Setting, Affective Priming, and Voting Intentions.” International Journal of Public Opinion Research22 (2): 204–29.
4.
BeckerLee B.McCombsMaxwell E.1978. “The Role of the Press in Determining Voter Reactions to Presidential Primaries.” Human Communication Research4 (4): 301–07.
5.
BennettW. LanceIyengarShanto. 2008. “A New Era of Minimal Effects? The Changing Foundations of Political Communication.” Journal of Communication58 (4): 707–31.
6.
BoomgaardenHajo G.BoukesMarkIorgoveanuAurora. 2016. “Image versus Text: How Newspaper Reports Affect Evaluations of Political Candidates.” International Journal of Communication10:2529–55.
7.
BoomgaardenHajo G.SemetkoHolli A.2012. “Nachrichten-Bias. Medieninhalte, Bevölkerungswahrnehmungen und Wahlentscheidungen bei der Bundestagswahl 2009” [News Bias. Media Content and Public Opinion during the Bundestag Elections 2009]. In Politische Vierteljahresschrift. Sonderheft 45, ed. Schmitt-BeckRüdiger, 449–471. Baden-Baden: Nomos.
8.
BosLindavan der BrugWouterde VreeseClaes H.2011. “How the Media Shape Perceptions of Right-Wing Populist Leaders.” Political Communication28 (2): 182–206.
9.
BrandenburgHeinz. 2005. “Political Bias in the Irish Media: A Quantitative Study of Campaign Coverage during the 2002 General Election.” Irish Political Studies20 (3): 297–322.
10.
BrettschneiderFrank. 2002. Spitzenkandidaten und Wahlerfolg: Personalisierung—Kompetenz—Parteien. Ein internationaler Vergleich [Front-Runners and Electoral Success: Personalization—Competence—Parties. An International Comparison]. Wiesbaden: Springer-Verlag.
11.
BrüggemannMichaelEngesserSvenBüchelFlorinHumprechtEddaCastroLaia. 2014. “Hallin and Mancini Revisited: Four Empirical Types of Western Media Systems”Journal of Communication64 (6): 1037–65.
12.
BulkowKristinUrbanJulianeSchweigerWolfgang. 2013. “The Duality of Agenda-Setting: The Role of Information Processing.” International Journal of Public Opinion Research25 (1): 43–63.
13.
ChaikenShelly. 1980. “Heuristic versus Systematic Information Processing and the Use of Source versus Message Cues in Persuasion.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology39 (5): 752–66.
14.
ColemanRenitaWuDenis. 2015. Image and Emotion in Voter Decisions: The Affect Agenda. Lanham: Lexington Books.
15.
D’AlessioDaveAllenMike. 2000. “Media Bias in Presidential Elections: A Meta-Analysis.” Journal of Communication50 (4): 133–56.
16.
DaltonRussel J.WattenbergMartin P.2000. Parties without Partisans: Political Change in Advanced Industrial Democracies. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
17.
DruckmanJames N.JacobsLawrence R.OstermeierEric. 2004. “Candidate Strategies to Prime Issues and Image.” The Journal of Politics66 (4): 1180–1202.
18.
DruckmanJames N.ParkinMichael. 2005. “The Impact of Media Bias: How Editorial Slant Affects Voters.” The Journal of Politics67 (4): 1030–49.
19.
EberlJakob-MoritzBoomgaardenHajo G.WagnerMarkus. (2015). “One Bias Fits All? Three Types of Media Bias and Their Effects on Party Preferences.” Communication Research. Published electronically November192015. doi:10.1177/0093650215614364.
20.
EberlJakob-MoritzVonbunRamonaHaselmayerMartinJacobiCarinaKönigslöwKatharina Kleinen-vonKlausSchönbachBoomgaardenHajo G.2016. “AUTNES Manual Content Analysis of the Media Coverage 2013.” GESIS Data Archive, Cologne. [ZA5864 Data File Version 1.0.0]. doi:10.4232/1.12565.
21.
FournierPatrickNadeauRichardBlaisAndréGidengilElisabethNevitteNeil. 2004. “Time-of-Voting Decision and Susceptibility to Campaign Effects.” Electoral Studies23 (4): 661–81.
22.
FunkCarolyn L.1996. “Understanding Trait Inferences in Candidate Images.” In Rethinking Rationality: Research in Micropolitics, ed. CarpiniMichael DelliHuddyLeonieShapiroRobert Y., 97–123. Greenwich: JAI Press.
23.
GarziaDiego. 2011. “The Personalization of Politics in Western Democracies: Causes and Consequences on Leader–Follower Relationships.” The Leadership Quarterly22 (4): 697–709.
24.
HallinDaniel C.ManciniPaolo. 2004. Comparing Media Systems: Three Models of Media and Politics. New York: Cambridge University Press.
HolbertR. LanceGarrettR. KellyGleasonLaurel S.2010. “A New Era of Minimal Effects? A Response to Bennett and Iyengar.” Journal of Communication60 (1): 15–34.
27.
HopmannDavid N.Van AelstPeterLegnanteGuido. 2011. “Political Balance in the News: A Review of Concepts, Operationalizations and Key Findings.” Journalism13 (2): 240–57.
28.
HopmannDavid N.VliegenthartRensde VreeseClaesAlbækErik. 2010. “Effects of Election News Coverage: How Visibility and Tone Influence Party Choice.” Political Communication27 (4): 389–405.
29.
KarvonenLauri. 2010. The Personalisation of Politics: A Study of Parliamentary Democracies. Colchester: ECPR Press.
30.
KinderDonald R.1986. “Presidential Character Revisited.” In Political Cognition, ed. LauRichard R.SearsDavid O.Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum: 233-255.
KingAnthony. 2002. “Do Leaders’ Personalities Really Matter?” In Leaders’ Personalities and the Outcomes of Democratic Elections, ed. KingAnthony, 1–43. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
33.
KiousisSpiro. 2005. “Compelling Arguments and Attitude Strength Exploring the Impact of Second-Level Agenda Setting on Public Opinion of Presidential Candidate Images.” The Harvard International Journal of Press/Politics10 (2): 3–27.
34.
KiousisSpiroBantimaroudisPhilemonBanHyun. 1999. “Candidate Image Attributes Experiments on the Substantive Dimension of Second Level Agenda Setting.” Communication Research26 (4): 414–28.
35.
KiousisSpiroMcCombsMaxwell E.2004. “Agenda-Setting Effects and Attitude Strength Political Figures during the 1996 Presidential Election.” Communication Research31 (1): 36–57.
36.
KoopmansRuudStathamPaul. 1999. “Political Claims Analysis: Integrating Protest Event and Political Discource Approaches.” Mobilization: An International Quarterly4 (2): 203-221.
37.
KritzingerSylviaJohannDavidGlantschniggChristianAichholzerJulianGlinitzerKonstantinJohannDavidThomasKathrinWagnerMarkus. 2016. “AUTNES Pre- and Post-Panel Study 2013.” GESIS Data Archive, Cologne. [ZA5859 Data File Version 2.0.0]. doi:10.4232/1.12425.
38.
KritzingerSylviaJohannDavidGlantschniggChristianAichholzerJulianGlinitzerKonstantinZeglovitsEva. 2014. “AUTNES TV Debates Panel Study 2013.” GESIS Data Archive, Cologne. [ZA5858 Data File version 1.0.0]. doi:10.4232/1.11951.
39.
LauRichard R.1982. “Negativity in Political Perception.” Political Behavior4 (4): 353–77.
40.
LawsonChapellLenzGabriel S.BakerAndyMyersMichael. 2010. “Looking Like a Winner: Candidate Appearance and Electoral Success in New Democracies.” World Politics62 (4): 561–93.
41.
LelkesYphtach. (2016). “Winners, Losers, and the Press: The Relationship between Political Parallelism and the Legitimacy Gap.” Political Communication. Published electronically January192016. doi:10.1080/10584609.2015.1117031. 523–543.
42.
LenzGabriel S.LawsonChappell. 2011. “Looking the Part: Television Leads Less Informed Citizens to Vote Based on Candidates’ Appearance.” American Journal of Political Science55 (3): 574–89.
43.
LevenduskyMatthew S.2013. “Why Do Partisan Media Polarize Viewers?”American Journal of Political Science57 (3): 611–23.
44.
McAllisterIan. 2007. “The Personalization of Politics.” In The Oxford Handbook of Political Behavior, ed. DaltonRussell J.KlingemannHans-Dieter, 571–88. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
45.
McQuailDenis. 1992. Media Performance: Mass Communication and the Public Interest. London: Sage.
46.
MidtbøTor. 2011. “Explaining Media Attention for Norwegian MPs: A New Modelling Approach.” Scandinavian Political Studies34 (3): 226–49.
47.
MillerArthur H.WattenbergMartin P.MalanchukOksana. 1986. “Schematic Assessments of Presidential Candidates.” American Political Science Review80 (2): 521–40.
48.
MillerJoanne M.KrosnickJon A.2000. “News Media Impact on the Ingredients of Presidential Evaluations: Politically Knowledgeable Citizens Are Guided by a Trusted Source.” American Journal of Political Science44 (2): 301–15.
49.
MillerWarren E.ShanksJ. Merrill. 1996. The New American Voter. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
50.
MüllerWolfgang C.BodlosAnitaDolezalMartinEderNikolausEnnser-JedenastikLaurenzKalteneggerMatthiasMeyerThomas M.PraprotnikKatrinWinklerAnna Katharina. 2016. “AUTNES Coding of Party Press Releases 2013.” GESIS Data Archive, Cologne. [ZA5861 Data File Version 1.0.0].
51.
NorrisPippaCurticeJohnSandersDavidScammellMargaretSemetkoHolli A.1999. On Message: Communicating the Campaign. London: Sage.
52.
OegemaDirkKleinnijenhuisJan. 2000. “Personalization in Political Television News: A 13-Wave Survey Study to Assess Effects of Text and Footage.” Communications25:43–60.
53.
PettyRichard E.CacioppoJohn T.1986. The Elaboration Likelihood Model of Persuasion. New York: Springer.
54.
ReinemannCarstenWilkeJürgen. 2007. “It’s the Debates, Stupid! How the Introduction of Televised Debates Changed the Portrayal of Chancellor Candidates in the German Press, 1949–2005.” The Harvard International Journal of Press/Politics. 12 (4): 92–111.
55.
SemetkoHolli A.BoomgaardenHajo G.2007. “Reporting Germany’s 2005 Bundestag Election Campaign: Was Gender an Issue?” The Harvard International Journal of Press/Politics12 (4): 154–71.
56.
StrömbäckJesper. 2008. “Four Phases of Mediatization: An Analysis of the Mediatization of Politics.” The International Journal of Press/Politics13 (3): 228–46.
57.
TakensJanetKleinnijenhuisJanVan HoofAnitaVan AtteveldtWouter. 2015. “Party Leaders in the Media and Voting Behavior: Priming Rather than Learning or Projection.” Political Communication32 (2): 249–67.
58.
TenscherJens. 2013. “Politicians’ Ideas of Ideal Politicians: Findings from German and Austrian State Parliaments.” German Politics22 (4): 379–95.
59.
TodorovAlexanderChaikenShellyHendersonMarlone D.2002. “The Heuristic-Systematic Model of Social Information Processing.” In The Persuasion Handbook: Developments in Theory and Practice, ed. DillardJames P.PfauMichael, 195–211. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
60.
Van AelstPeterSheaferTamirStanyerJames. 2011. “The Personalization of Mediated Political Communication: A Review of Concepts, Operationalizations and Key Findings.” Journalism13 (2): 203–20.
61.
van DalenArjen. 2012. “Structural Bias in Cross-National Perspective: How Political Systems and Journalism Cultures Influence Government Dominance in the News.” The Harvard International Journal of Press/Politics17 (1): 32–55.
62.
van der EijkCeesvan der BrugWouterKrohMartinFranklinMark. 2006. “Rethinking the Dependent Variable in Voting Behavior: On the Measurement and Analysis of Electoral Utilities.” Electoral Studies25 (3): 424–47.
63.
van der WurffRichardvan CuilenburgJan. 2001. “Impact of Moderate and Ruinous Competition on Diversity: The Dutch Television Market.” The Journal of Media Economics14 (4): 213–29.
64.
van KempenHetty. 2007. “Media-Party Parallelism and Its Effects: A Cross-National Comparative Study.” Political Communication24 (3): 303–20.
65.
van SantenRosavan ZoonenLibset. 2009. “Stand van de wetenschap: Popularisering en personalisering in politieke communicatie [Popularization and Personalization in Political Communication].” Tijdschrift voor Communicatiewetenschappen37 (2): 155–76.
66.
VavreckLynn. 2009. The Message Matters: The Economy and Presidential Campaigns. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
67.
VliegenthartRensBoomgaardenHajo G.van SpanjeJoost. 2012. “Anti-Immigrant Party Support and Media Visibility: A Cross-Party, Over-Time Perspective.” Journal of Elections, Public Opinion and Parties22 (3): 315–58.
68.
WuH. DenisColemanRenita. 2014. “The Affective Effect on Political Judgment Comparing the Influences of Candidate Attributes and Issue Congruence.” Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly91 (3): 530–43.
69.
ZallerJohn R.1992. The Nature and Origins of Mass Opinion. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
