Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

CiteULike is a free service for managing and discovering scholarly references - click here to get started.

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
American Behavioral Scientist
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by CARLIN, D. B.
Right arrow Articles by SMITH, S.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

The Influence of Format and Questions on Candidates' Strategic Argument Choices in the 2000 Presidential Debates

DIANA B. CARLIN

University of Kansas

ERIC MORRIS

University of Kansas

SHAWNA SMITH

University of Kansas

Building on past content analyses of presidential debates to determine how format affects the levels of clash and candidates' strategies, this study answers three questions about the 2000 presidential debates: (a) Do candidates differ in their use of clash and nonclash argument strategies? (b) Does format affect candidates' strategic choices? and (c) Does the structure of questions explain strategic choices? Results of the content analysis suggest that format and question content affect candidates' strategic choices; however, other factors including the larger campaign strategy, polling data, and performance in previous debates also influence strategies.

American Behavioral Scientist, Vol. 44, No. 12, 2196-2218 (2001)
DOI: 10.1177/00027640121958276
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Communication ResearchHome page
M. Maurer and C. Reinemann
Learning Versus Knowing: Effects of Misinformation in Televised Debates
Communication Research, December 1, 2006; 33(6): 489 - 506.
[Abstract] [PDF]