Abstract
There is very little research about the relative influence of campaign communication forms or venues on normative outcomes concerning the extent to which campaign communication promotes or degrades basic democratic values. This investigation assesses the relative impact of 17 communication forms on three normative outcomes: political expertise, which embodies people’s awareness, knowledge, and interest in politics; attitude about the process used to elect candidates; and likelihood of participating in the political process. Data are based on results of two national surveys conducted in different phases of the 2004 presidential campaign. Hierarchical regression analyses are used to evaluate the relative influence of the 17 communication forms on normative outcomes, controlling for sociodemographic variables.
Highlights
The relationship between media use and civic and political behavior is complicated and only partly understood
The question is, Which communication forms promote, and which degrade, normative outcomes? In an era in which analysts warn of rising levels of public cynicism and Americans’ disengagement in public life (e.g., Moy & Pfau, 2000; Nye, Zelikow, & King, 1997; Putnam, 2000), communication venues employed in campaigns may ameliorate or exacerbate these problems
The Mid- and Late September Phase of the Campaign The results of the first survey, conducted during mid- and late September, reveal that the full regression equations were significant for all dependent variables: political expertise, F(23, 381) = 13.19, p < .001; attitude toward the process used to elect a president, F(24, 380) = 2.87, p < .001; and likelihood of participating in the political process, F(24, 380) = 13.69, p
Summary
The relationship between media use and civic and political behavior is complicated and only partly understood. Recent research examines the relative impact of various communication forms or venues (e.g., newspapers, the Internet, network television news) on users’ perceptions of political candidates and likelihood of voting for them. Little attention has been paid to the relative impact of these forms on normative outcomes. Such reticence must end because, as McLeod, Kosicki, and McLeod (1994) insisted, political communication research “cannot evade normative assumptions of how social institutions ‘ought to’ work” Normative issues concern whether campaign communication contributes to positive attitudes about the process used to elect candidates, facilitates people’s involvement in politics, and enhances likelihood of participating in the political process. The question is, Which communication forms promote, and which degrade, normative outcomes? There is a paucity of empirical evidence about this claim, and that which is available is divided as to whether communication forms exert a positive or negative impact
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
