Learning from Presidential Debates: Who Learns the Most and Why?

Abstract

Perhaps one of the most well-established findings stemming from decades of research exploring the effects of televised presidential debates is that exposure to this "information-rich" source of campaign communication enables viewers' acquisition of issue knowledge. However, certain individuals will benefit more from the debate viewing experience because differences in individual characteristics allow some to learn more than others. In this quasi-experimental study, we test whether those with more pre-debate knowledge, political information efficacy, and need for cognition gain more information from debate viewing. In so doing, we clarify the mechanisms that underlie information acquisition from debates and consider the boundary conditions that constrain debate learning. The findings provide more nuance to our understanding of the mechanisms behind the learning of political knowledge from televised candidate debates.

Closing the Knowledge Gap: How Issue Priming Before Presidential Debate Viewing Encourages Learning and Opinion Articulation

“…Prior political knowledge provides one with a more detailed cognitive architecture that enhances one's ability to elaborate on the political messages and thus retain and recall issue information following the debate. In explaining the nuanced nature of information processing from debate exposure, Jennings et al (2020) also found that those debate viewers with greater need for cognition retained more accurate issue information and therefore need for cognition provides debate viewers with motivation to elaborate on new information.…”

“…More recent research exploring the learning process from televised debate exposure has demonstrated that those individuals with higher levels of pre-debate political knowledge can more readily assimilate the information they encounter in the debate into their preexisting cognitive architectures (Jennings et al, 2020). In short, more political knowledge before a debate leads to greater learning during the debate.…”

Comparación entre la cobertura de la prensa a campañas presidenciales y la agenda de los periodistas que conducen debates

“…Además, los moderadores deben procurar que los temas que se discutan sean de interés público, dado que un elemento fundamental de cualquier debate es la transacción de información (Schroeder, 2000). Toda la bibliografía reitera positivos aumentos en el conocimiento del público respecto de los asuntos de políticas públicas, incluso disminuyendo los niveles de cinismo político y aumentando el interés por seguir la campaña y participar (Jennings et al, 2020;McKinney & Warner, 2013).…”

A Functional Approach to the 2019 Indonesian Presidential Debate

“…Several findings have supported these hypotheses (Benoit, 1999;2015;Benoit & Harthcock, 1999;Benoit & Henson, 2007;Benoit & Wells, 1996). Some studies have indicated that presidential debates have the property to enhance democratic values and influence the public perceptions of candidates (Pfau, 2002), and policy position and character evaluation (Benoit, McKinney, & Holbert, 2001;Benoit & Hansen, 2004;Benoit, Hansen, & Verser, 2003;Jennings et al, 2020;McKinney & Warner, 2013;Winneg & Jamieson, 2017). Due to this competitive and appraisal nature, the presidential debate has particular usefulness and can spark the public's interest, unlike other forms of political campaigns.…”