The Perception of the Debates as a Decision Factor in Electoral Behavior in the General Elections of April 2019

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.4185/RLCS-2020-1436

Keywords:

electoral debates; political communication; electoral behavior; vote

Abstract

Introduction: This paper analyses the effects of the electoral debates on citizens’ perceptions about the candidates and on the vote for the main parties in the General Elections of April 2019. Methodology: Descriptive analysis and generalized linear models with link logit to explain the vote, through the use of the Post-Election Study No. 3248 of the General Elections, 2019 prepared by the Center for Sociological Research (CIS by its acronym in Spanish). Results: The models show that the perception about which candidate was the most convincing in the electoral debates significantly influences the vote. Discussion and conclusions: Electoral debates have mainly a reinforcing effect on both the vote and the leadership of the participants in these.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biographies

Nieves Lagares Diez, University of Santiago de Compostela

Professor of Political Science and Administration at the University of Santiago de Compostela and an expert in the study of the formation and organization of political parties, leadership, and political marketing. Among her most recent publications are the books published alogside J. M. Rivera and J. Montabes in 2016, Cataluña en proceso: las elecciones autonómicas de 2015 (Valencia: Tirant lo Blanch); and together with C. Ortega and P. Oñate in 2019, Las elecciones autonómicas de 2015 y 2016 (Madrid: CIS), and the article “Condiciones y razones del procés” with E. Jaráiz and X. L. Barreiro (2017), Aucaria, 19, 141-170.

Erika Jaráiz Gulías, University of Santiago de Compostela

Doctor in Political Science and a professor in the Department of Political Science and Sociology of the USC since 2008. She belongs to the Political Research Team of the same university, listed as a Competitive Reference Group by the Xunta de Galicia. She has presented numerous communications at national and international conferences. She has experience in electoral campaigns and has been Manager of the Commonwealth of the Inter-municipal area of Vigo (2007-2014) and Chief of Staff of the Secretariat of Analysis and Projection of the Presidency of the Xunta de Galicia (2005-2007). She has participated in numerous contracts and research projects, some of which she has directed as principal researcher, among which are the “Realization of a practical guidance guide for conducting studies of demand analysis and satisfaction surveys (2014 )” and the preparation of the“ Citizen Perception Report: The Quality of Public Services IX ”(2014 and 2015)”, both for the Spanish Agency for Evaluation and Quality of Services (AEVAL by its acronym in Spanish). She usually teaches in several Masters, both her own and official ones, among which the ones that stand out are the Master's Degree in Marketing, Consulting and Political Communication of the USC, in which she is Secretary of the Academic Commission, and the Master's Degree in Leadership and Public Management (INAP), where she also coordinates the TFM module. She has also received methodological training at the Essex Summer School in Social Science Data Analysis and Collection and the Universitat Pompeu Fabra, among others. She is the Writing Secretary of the Journal of Political and Sociological Research.

Paloma Castro Martínez, University of Santiago de Compostela

Paloma Castro Martínez is a senior research support technician in the Political Research Team of the University of Santiago de Compostela, listed as a Competitive Reference Group by the Xunta de Galicia. Currently, she is pursuing a Ph.D. program in Political Marketing, actors and institutions in contemporary societies in the same university. Her most recent publications are: “The protest and the vote. How much of protest is in the vote to the new parties?”, written in collaboration with María Pereira and Adrián García, for the book Las elecciones autonómicas de 2015 y 2016 by N. Lagares, C. Ortega, and P. Oñate (Eds.). Madrid. CIS, 2019; “Media agenda and political agenda”, written with Antón Losada, and “Analysis of the electoral debates: the process as a master frame”, together with Elba Maneiro and Alejandro Peso, for the book Cataluña en proceso, by J.M. Rivera, J. Montabes, and N. Lagares (Eds.). Valencia. Tirant lo Blanch, 2017. She also has methodological training after completing the Master in Statistical Techniques at the University of Santiago de Compostela.

References

Abramowitz, A. I. (1978). The Impact of a Presidential Debate on Voter Rationality. American Journal of Political Science, (22), 680-680. http://doi.org/10.2307/2110467

Barreiro, X. L., Pereira, M. y García, G. (2015). Los efectos sobre el voto de la campaña electoral en las elecciones europeas de 2014 en España. Revista Española de Ciencia Política, (39), 67-93.

Benoit, W. L. & Wells, W.T. (1996). Candidates in conflict: Persuasive attack and defense in the 1992 presidential debates. University of Alabama Press.

Benoit, W. L. & Harthcock, A. (1999). Functions of Great Debates: Acclaims, Attacks, and Defenses in the 1960 Presidential Debates. Communication Monographs, 66(4), 341-357. http://doi.org/10.1080/03637759909376484

Benoit, W. L., McKinney, M. S. & Holbert, R. L. (2001). Beyond Learning and Persona: Extending the Scope of Presidential Debate Effects. Communication Monograph, 68(3), 259-273. http://doi.org/10.1080/03637750128060

Benoit, W. L. & Brazeal, L. M. (2002). A Functional Analysis of the 1988 Bush-Dukakis Presidential Debates. Argumentary and Advocacy, 38(4), 219-233. http://doi.org/10.1080/00028533.2002.11821569

Benoit, W. L., Hansen, G. & Verser, R. (2003). A Meta-Analysis of the Effects of Viewing U.S. Presidential Debates. Comunication Monographs, 70(4), 355-350. http://doi.org/10.1080/0363775032000179133

Benoit, W. L., Hansen, G. & Verser, R. (2004). Presidential Debate Watching, Issue Knowledge, Character Evaluation, and Vote Choice. Human Communication Research, 30(1), 335-350. http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2958.2004.tb00727.x

Benoit, W. L. (2007). Communication in Political Campaigns. Peter Lang.

Best, S. J. & Hubbard, C. (1999). Maximizing Minimal Effects: The Impact of Early Primary Season Debates on Voter Preferences. American Politics Quarterly, 27(4), 450-467. http://doi.org/10.1177/1532673X99027004004

Bishop, G. F., Meadow, R. G. & Jackson-Beeck, M. (Eds.) (1978). The Presidential Debates. Praeguer.

Blais, A. & Boyer, M. (1996). Assesing the Impact of Televised Debates: The Case of the 1988 Canadian Election. Bristish Journal of Political Science, (26), 143-164. http://doi.org/10.1017/S0007123400000405

Carrera, V. (2015). La red de confianza de los debates electorales y la mente de los candidatos. Revista Marco, (1), 39-61.

Castro, P., Maneiro, E. y Peso, A. (2017). Análisis de los debates electorales: el procés como master frame. En J. M. Rivera, J. Montabes y N. Lagares (Eds.), Cataluña en proceso: las elecciones autonómicas de 2015, (pp. 213-235). Tirant lo Blanch.

Cho, J. & Ha, Y. (2012). On the Communicative Underpinnings of Campaigns Effects: Presidential Debates, Citizen Communication, and Polarization in Evaluations of Candidates. Political Communication, 29(2), 184-2014. http://doi.org/10.1080/10584609.2012.671233

Crespo, I., Garrido, A., Riorda, M. & Carletta, I. (2011). Manual de Comunicación Política y estrategias de campaña. Candidatos, medios y electorales en una nueva era. Biblios.

Downs, A. (1957). An Economic Theory of Democracy. John Wiley.

Gallego, M. y Bernárdez, A. (2017). Influencia y repercusión mediática de los debates “cara a cara” celebrados ante las elecciones generales de 2008 en España: José Luís Rodríguez Zapatero (PSOE) Vs. Mariano Rajoy (PP). Vivat Academia. Revista de Comunicación, (141), 139-154. http://doi.org/10.15178/va.2017.141.139-154

García, J. (2015). La cobertura mediática de los debates electorales en España. Revista Española de Ciencia Política, (38), 135-161.

Garrido, A. y Sierra, J. (forthcoming). Los efectos de los debates electorales sobre la decisión de voto: Un estudio a través de las encuestas del CIS. Universidad de Murcia.

Geer, J. G. (1988). The Effects of Presidential Debates on the Electorate´s Preferences for Candidates. American Political Quarterly, 16(4), 486-501.

http://doi.org/10.1177/004478088016004005

Herranz-Rubio, C. (2020). La producción científica sobre los debates electorales en España: Análisis bibliométrico (1993-2018). Revista Mediterránea de Comunicación/Mediterranean Journal of Communication, 11(1). http://doi.org/10.14198/MEDCOM2020.11.1.2

Herrero, J. C. y Benoit, W. L. (2009). Análisis funcional de los debates en las elecciones generales de 2008. Zer-Revista de Estudios de Comunicación, 14(27), 61-81.

Holbrook, T. M. (1994). The Behavioral Consequences of Vice-Presidential Debates: Does the Undercard Have any Punch? American Politics Quarterly, 22(4), 469-482. http://doi.org/10.1177/1532673X9402200404

Holbrook, T. M. (1996). Do Campaigns Matter? Sagei.

Coma, F. M. (2008). ¿Por qué importan las campañas electorales? CIS.

Informe Barlovento: Debate Electoral 22 Abril 2019.

Informe Barlovento: Debate Electoral 23 Abril 2019.

Isolatus, P. (2011). Analyzing Presidential Debates. Functional Theory and Finnish Political Communication Culture. Nordicom Review, 32(1), 31-43.

Jamieson, K. H. & Adasiewicz, C. (2000). What can voters learn from election debates. En S. Coleman (Ed.). Televised election debates. International perspectives, (pp. 25-42). MacMillan.

Jamieson, K. H. & Birdsell, D. S. (2000). Presidential Debates: The Challenge of Creating an Informed Electorate. Oxford, Reino Unido: Oxford University Press.

Kinder, D. R., Peters, M. D., Abelson, R. P. & Fiske, S. T. (1980). Presidential Prototypes. Political Behavior, (2), 315-337.

Lledó, P. (2001). La influencia de los debates electorales sobre la decisión de voto: el caso de mayo de 1993. Revista Española de Ciencia Política, (5), 143-170.

Luengo, Ó. (2011). Debates electorales en televisión: una aproximación preliminar a sus efectos inmediatos. Revista Española de Ciencia Política, (25), 91-96.

Lanoue, J. D. (1992). One that Made a Difference. Cognitive, Consistency, Political, Knowledge, and the 1980 Presidential Debate. Public Opinion Quarterly, 56(2), 168-184. http://doi.org/10.1086/269309

Manin, B. (2006). Los principios del gobierno representativo. Alianza Editorial.

Martel, M. (1983). Political Campaign Debates: Images, Strategies, and Tactics. Longman.

McLeod, J. M., Durall, J. A., Ziemke, D. A. & Bybee, C. R. (1979). Reactions of Young and Older Voters: Expanding the Context of Effects. En: S. Kraus (Ed.). The Great Debates: Carter vs. Ford, 1976. Indiana University Press.

Nimmo, D. & Savage, R. L. (1976). Candidates and their images: Concepts, Methods, and Findings. Goodyear.

Popkin, S. L. (1994). The Reasoning Voter. University of Chicago Press.

Shelley, M. C. & Hwang, H. (1991). The Mass Media and Public Opinion Polls in the 1988 Presidential Election. Trends, Accuracy, Consistency and Events. American Political Quarterly, 19(1), 59-79. http://doi.org/10.1177/1532673X9101900104

Schrott, P. (1990). Electoral Consequences of Winning Debates. Public Opinion Quarterly, 54(4), 567-585. http://doi.org/10.1086/269228

Sierra, J. (2012). Planteamientos sobre los efectos de los debates electorales en televisión: aplicación al caso español. XXII World Congress of Politican Science. Madrid, España.

Weiler, M. (1989). The 1988 Electoral Debates and Debate Theory. Argumentation and Advocacy, 25(4), 214-219. http://doi.org/10.1080/00028533.1989.11951401

Yawn, M. & Beatty, B. (2000). Debate-induced Opinion Change: What Matters? American Politics Quarterly, 28(2), 270-285. http://doi.org/10.1177/1532673X00028002007

Downloads

Published

2020-04-28

How to Cite

Lagares Diez, N., Jaráiz Gulías, E., & Castro Martínez, P. . (2020). The Perception of the Debates as a Decision Factor in Electoral Behavior in the General Elections of April 2019. Revista Latina de Comunicación Social, (76), 39–58. https://doi.org/10.4185/RLCS-2020-1436

Issue

No. 76 (2020)

Section

Miscellaneous
Crossref
Scopus
Google Scholar
Europe PMC

Most read articles by the same author(s)