Television is customarily put forward as a driver of the “personalization of politics.” The characteristics of this visual medium arguably accentuate personality at the expense of substantive programmatic goals, downplaying partisan attachments and ideology as determinants of the vote in favor of candidate and party leader assessments. While there is evidence of this trend for presidential democracies, notably the United States, this linkage is yet to be fully explored for parliamentary democracies undergoing a process of personalization. This study addresses this gap through an analysis of pooled national election study data from thirteen Western European parliamentary democracies collected between 1982 and 2016. Our results show that leader effects are significantly stronger among individuals with a television-dominant media diet. The findings provide support to the yet underdeveloped theoretical relationship between media change and the personalization of politics, while also speaking to the broader question involving the importance of media for contemporary democratic elections.
AalderingLoes. 2018. “The (Ir)rationality of Mediated Leader Effects.” Electoral Studies54:269–80.
2.
AltheideDavid L.SnowRobert P. 1979. Media Logic. London: Sage.
3.
BoulianneShelley. 2011. “Stimulating or Reinforcing Political Interest: Using Panel Data to Examine Reciprocal Effects between News Media and Political Interest.” Political Communication28 (2): 147–62.
4.
ChadwickAndrew. 2013. The Hybrid Media System: Politics and Power. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
DaltonRussell J.FarrellDavid M.McAllisterIan. 2011. Political Parties and Democratic Linkage. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
7.
DaltonRussell J.McAllisterIanWattenbergMartin P. 2000. “The Consequences of Partisan Dealignment.” In Parties without Partisans, ed. DaltonRussell J.WattenbergMartin P., 37–63. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
8.
DruckmanJames N.2003. “The Power of Television Images: The First Kennedy-Nixon Debate Revisited.” The Journal of Politics65 (2): 559–71.
9.
Elmelund-PræstekærChristianHopmannDavid. 2012. “Does Television Personalise Voting Behaviour? Studying the Effects of Media Exposure on Voting for Candidates or Parties.” Scandinavian Political Studies35:117–40.
10.
GarziaDiego. 2014. Personalization of Politics and Electoral Change. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
11.
GarziaDiego. 2017a. “Voter Evaluation of Candidates and Party Leaders”. In The SAGE Handbook of Electoral Behaviour, ed, ArzheimerKaiEvansJocelynLewis-BeckMichael S., 633–53. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
12.
GarziaDiego. 2017b. “Personalization of Politics between Television and the Internet: Leader Effects in the 2013 Italian Parliamentary Election.” Journal of Information Technology & Politics14 (4): 403–16.
13.
GidengilElizabeth. 2011. “Voter Characteristics and Leader Effects.” In Political Leaders and Democratic Elections, ed. AartsKeesBlaisAndréSchmittHermann, 147–64. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
14.
GoldmanSeth K.MutzDiana C.DilliplaneSusanna. 2013. “All Virtue Is Relative: A Response to Prior.” Political Communication30 (4): 635–53.
15.
GuessAndrew M.2014. “Measure for Measure: An Experimental Test of Online Political Media Exposure.” Political Analysis23 (1): 59–75.
16.
HallinDaniel C.ManciniPaolo. 2004. Comparing Media Systems. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
17.
HayesDanny. 2009. “Has Television Personalized Voting Behavior?” Political Behavior31 (2): 231–60.
18.
HolianDavid B.PrysbyCharles L. 2014. Candidate Character Traits in Presidential Elections. New York: Routledge.
19.
HolmbergSörenOscarssonHenrik. 2011. “Party Leader Effects on the Vote.” In Political Leaders and Democratic Elections, ed. AartsKeesBlaisAndréSchmittHermann, 35–51. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
20.
InglehartRonaldKlingemannHans-Dieter. 1976. “Party Identification, Ideological Preference and the Left-Right Dimension Among Western Mass Publics”. In Party Identification and Beyond: Representations of Voting and Party Competition, ed. BudgeIanCreweIvorFarlieDennis, 243–73. London: John Wiley.
21.
KarvonenLauri. 2010. The Personalisation of Politics. Colchester, UK: European Consortium for Political Research Press.
22.
KeeterScott. 1987. “The Illusion of Intimacy: Television and the Role of Candidate Personal Qualities in Voter Choice.” Public Opinion Quarterly51:344–58.
23.
LangerAna Inés. 2010. “The Politicization of Private Persona: Exceptional Leaders or the New Rule? The Case of the United Kingdom and the Blair Effect.” The International Journal of Press/Politics15 (1): 60–76.
24.
LenzGabrielLawsonChappell. 2011. “Looking the Part: Television Leads Less Informed Citizens to Vote Based on Candidates’ Appearance.” American Journal of Political Science55 (3): 574–89.
25.
LewisCarmen C.GeorgeJoey F. 2008. “Cross-Cultural Deception in Social Networking Sites and Face-to-Face Communication.” Computers in Human Behavior24 (6): 2945–64.
26.
MairPeter. 2006. Ruling the Void? The Hollowing of Western Democracy. London: Verso Books.
27.
MairPeterMüllerWolfgang C.PlasserFritz, eds. 2004. Political Parties and Electoral Change. London: Sage.
28.
MazzoleniGiampietro. 1987. “Media Logic and Party Logic in Campaign Coverage: The Italian General Election of 1983.” European Journal of Communication2 (1): 81–103.
29.
MazzoleniGiampietro. 2000. “A Return to Civic and Political Engagement Prompted by Personalized Political Leadership?” Political Communication17 (4): 325–28.
30.
McLeodJackGlynnCarrollMcDonaldDaniel. 1983. “Issues and Images: The Influence of Media Reliance in Voting Decisions.” Communication Research10 (1): 37–58.
31.
MendelsohnMatthew. 1996. “The Media and Interpersonal Communications: The Priming of Issues, Leaders, and Party Identification.” Journal of Politics58 (1): 112–25.
32.
MughanAnthony. 2000. Media and the Presidentialization of Parliamentary Elections. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
33.
NaiAlessandro. 2018. “Going Negative, Worldwide: Towards a General Understanding of Determinants and Targets of Negative Campaigning.” Government and Opposition2018:1–26.
34.
OhrDieter. 2011. “Changing Patterns of Political Communication”. In Political Leaders and Democratic Elections, ed. AartsKeesBlaisAndréSchmittHermann, 11–34. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
35.
PostmanNeil. 1986. Amusing Ourselves to Death: Public Discourse in the Age of Show Business. New York: Penguin Books.
36.
PriorMarkus. 2006. “The Incumbent in the Living Room: The Rise of Television and the Incumbency Advantage in the U.S. House Elections.” The Journal of Politics68 (3): 657–73.
37.
PriorMarkus. 2009. “The Immensely Inflated News Audience: Assessing Bias in Self-Reported News Exposure.” Public Opinion Quarterly73:130–43.
38.
PriorMarkus. 2013. “The Challenge of Measuring Media Exposure: Reply to Dilliplane, Goldman, and Mutz.” Political Communication30 (4): 620–34.
39.
RahatGideonKenigOfir. 2018. From Party Politics to Personalized Politics?Oxford: Oxford University Press.
40.
RahatGideonSheaferTamir. 2007. “The Personalization(s) of Politics: Israel, 1949-2003.” Political Communication24 (1): 65–80.
41.
RicoGuillem. 2014. “Political Sophistication and Media Consumption as Factors of Personalization.” In Personality Politics? The Role of Leader Evaluations in Democratic Elections, ed. LoboMarina CostaCurticeJohn, 127–47. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
42.
SalgadoSusana. 2007. Os Veículos da Mensagem Política. Estudo de uma campanha eleitoral nos media [The Vehicles of the Political Message. Study of a Media Election Campaign]. Lisbon: Livros Horizonte.
43.
SartoriGiovanni. 1989. “Video-Power.” Government and Opposition24 (1): 39–53.
44.
SchulzWinfriedZehReimarQuiringOliver. 2005. “Voters in a Changing Media Environment: A Data-Based Retrospective on Consequences of Media Change in Germany.” European Journal of Communication20 (1): 55–88.
45.
SheaferTamir. 2001. “Charismatic Skills and Media Legitimacy: An Actor-Centered Approach to Understanding the Political Communication Competition.” Communication Research28 (6): 711–36.
46.
ShehataAdamStrömbackJesper. 2011. “A Matter of Context: A Comparative Study of Media Environments and News Consumption Gaps in Europe.” Political Communication28 (1): 110–34.
47.
StrömbackJesper. 2008. “Four Phases of Mediatization: An Analysis of the Mediatization of Politics.” The International Journal of Press/Politics13 (3): 228–46.
48.
StrömbackJesperDjerf-PierreMonikaShehataAdam. 2013. “The Dynamics of Political Interest and News Media Consumption: A Longitudinal Perspective.” International Journal of Public Opinion Research4 (1): 414–35.
49.
StrömbackJesperShehataAdam. 2010. “Media Malaise or a Virtuous Circle? Exploring the Causal Relationships between News Media Exposure, Political News Attention and Political Interest.” European Journal of Political Research49 (5): 575–97.
50.
TakensJanetKleinnijenhuisJanvan HoofAnitavan AtteveldtWouter. 2015. “Party Leaders in the Media and Voting Behavior: Priming Rather than Learning or Projections.” Political Communication32 (2): 249–67.
51.
TodorovAlexanderMandisodzaAnesuGorenAmirHallCrystal C. 2005. “Inferences of Competence from Faces Predict Election Outcomes.” Science308 (5728): 1623–26.
52.
van AelstPeter. 2007. Toeschouwer, speler of scheidsrechter? Een studie naar de rol van de media in de verkiezingscampagne van 2003 [Spectator, player or referee? A study into the role of the media in the 2003 election campaign]. Bruges, Belgium: Vanden Broele.
53.
van AelstPeterSheaferTamirStanyerJames. 2011. “The Personalization of Mediated Political Communication: A Review of Concepts, Operationalizations and Key Findings.” Journalism13 (2): 203–20.
54.
YamamotoMasahiroKushinMatthew J.DalisayFrancis. 2015. “Social Media and Mobiles as Political Mobilization Forces for Young Adults: Examining the Moderating Role of Online Political Expression in Political Participation.” New Media & Society17 (6): 880–98.
55.
ZhongBuHardinMarieSunTao. 2011. “Less Effortful Thinking Leads to More Social Networking? The Associations between the Use of Social Network Sites and Personality Traits.” Computers in Human Behavior27 (3): 1265–71.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
