IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/anname/v659y2015i1p225-245.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Power of Television Images in a Social Media Age

Author

Listed:
  • Dhavan V. Shah
  • Alex Hanna
  • Erik P. Bucy
  • Chris Wells
  • Vidal Quevedo

Abstract

There is considerable controversy surrounding the study of presidential debates, particularly efforts to connect their content and impact. Research has long debated whether the citizenry reacts to what candidates say, how they say it, or simply how they appear. This study uses detailed coding of the first 2012 debate between Barack Obama and Mitt Romney to test the relative influence of the candidates’ verbal persuasiveness and nonverbal features on viewers’ “second screen†behavior—their use of computers, tablets, and mobile phones to enhance or extend the televised viewing experience. To examine these relationships, we merged two datasets: (1) a shot-by-shot content analysis coded for functional, tonal, and visual elements of both candidates’ communication behavior during the debate; and (2) corresponding real-time measures, synched and lagged, of the volume and sentiment of Twitter expression about Obama and Romney. We find the candidates’ facial expressions and physical gestures to be more consistent and robust predictors of the volume and valence of Twitter expression than candidates’ persuasive strategies, verbal utterances, and voice tone during the debate.

Suggested Citation

  • Dhavan V. Shah & Alex Hanna & Erik P. Bucy & Chris Wells & Vidal Quevedo, 2015. "The Power of Television Images in a Social Media Age," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 659(1), pages 225-245, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:anname:v:659:y:2015:i:1:p:225-245
    DOI: 10.1177/0002716215569220
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0002716215569220
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0002716215569220?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mutz, Diana C. & Reeves, Byron, 2005. "The New Videomalaise: Effects of Televised Incivility on Political Trust," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 99(1), pages 1-15, February.
    2. Mutz, Diana C., 2007. "Effects of “In-Your-Face†Television Discourse on Perceptions of a Legitimate Opposition," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 101(4), pages 621-635, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Shapiro, Jesse M., 2016. "Special interests and the media: Theory and an application to climate change," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 91-108.
    2. Antoci, Angelo & Bonelli, Laura & Paglieri, Fabio & Reggiani, Tommaso & Sabatini, Fabio, 2019. "Civility and trust in social media," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 160(C), pages 83-99.
    3. Fabio Sabatini & Francesco Sarracino, 2017. "Online Networks and Subjective Well-Being," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 70(3), pages 456-480, August.
    4. Sarracino, Francesco & Riillo, Cesare Fabio Antonio, 2020. "Facing the challenge of globalization: the role of confidence in institutions," MPRA Paper 103692, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    5. Angelo Antoci & Alexia Delfino & Fabio Paglieri & Fabrizio Panebianco & Fabio Sabatini, 2016. "Civility vs. Incivility in Online Social Interactions: An Evolutionary Approach," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(11), pages 1-17, November.
    6. Sacha Bourgeois-Gironde & João V. Ferreira, 2020. "Conflicted voters: A spatial voting model with multiple party identifications," Post-Print hal-02909682, HAL.
    7. Lissitsa, Sabina, 2021. "Effects of digital use on trust in political institutions among ethnic minority and hegemonic group – A case study," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 66(C).
    8. Rogers, Todd & Aida, Masa, 2012. "What Does "Intending to Vote" Mean?," Working Paper Series rwp12-056, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.
    9. Chiara Vargiu, 2022. "It’s All Relative: Perceptions of (Comparative) Candidate Incivility and Candidate Sympathy in Three Multiparty Elections," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 10(4), pages 261-274.
    10. Wen-Chun Chang, 2018. "Media Use and Satisfaction with Democracy: Testing the Role of Political Interest," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 140(3), pages 999-1016, December.
    11. Jiaping Zhang & Xiaomei Gong & Zhongkun Zhu & Zhenyu Zhang, 2023. "Trust cost of environmental risk to government: the impact of Internet use," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 25(6), pages 5363-5392, June.
    12. Peter Schwardmann & Egon Tripodi & Joël J. van der Weele, 2019. "Self-Persuasion: Evidence from Field Experiments at Two International Debating Competitions," CESifo Working Paper Series 7946, CESifo.
    13. Wood, Reed M. & Juanchich, Marie & Ramirez, Mark & Zhang, Shenghao, 2023. "Promoting COVID-19 vaccine confidence through public responses to misinformation: The joint influence of message source and message content," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 324(C).
    14. Martin Haselmayer & Marcelo Jenny, 2017. "Sentiment analysis of political communication: combining a dictionary approach with crowdcoding," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 51(6), pages 2623-2646, November.
    15. Bingbing Zhang & Isabel Inguanzo & Homero Gil de Zúñiga, 2022. "Examining the Role of Online Uncivil Discussion and Ideological Extremity on Illegal Protest," Media and Communication, Cogitatio Press, vol. 10(4), pages 94-104.
    16. Lupia, Arthur & Menning, Jesse, 2005. "When Can Politicians Scare Citizens Into Supporting Bad Policies? A Theory of Incentives with Fear-Based Content," MPRA Paper 102, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 11 Sep 2006.
    17. Arthur Lupia & Jesse O. Menning, 2009. "When Can Politicians Scare Citizens Into Supporting Bad Policies?," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 53(1), pages 90-106, January.
    18. Angelo Antoci & Alexia Delfino & Fabio Paglieri & Fabio Sabatini, 2016. "The ecology of social interactions in online and offline environments," Papers 1601.07776, arXiv.org.
    19. Rogers, Todd & Aida, Masa, 2013. "Vote Self-Prediction Hardly Predicts Who Will Vote, and Is (Misleadingly) Unbiased," Working Paper Series rwp13-010, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.
    20. Anthony Dudo & John C Besley, 2016. "Scientists’ Prioritization of Communication Objectives for Public Engagement," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(2), pages 1-18, February.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:anname:v:659:y:2015:i:1:p:225-245. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.