American Behavioral Scientist

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Free Access - Register Here

Click here to sign up for SAGE Journal Email Alerts today!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
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
Right arrow Citation Map
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
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by McKINNEY, M. S.
Right arrow Articles by ROBERTSON, T. A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
American Behavioral Scientist, Vol. 44, No. 12, 2232-2251 (2001)
DOI: 10.1177/00027640121958294

The Front-Runner, Contenders, and Also-Rans

Effects of Watching a 2000 Republican Primary Debate

MITCHELL S. McKINNEY

University of Missouri-Columbia

LYNDA LEE KAID

University of Florida

TERRY A. ROBERTSON

Columbia College

This study reports the effects of viewing a Republican primary debate that took place December 2, 1999, in Manchester, New Hampshire, and includes six candidates: Gary Bauer, George Bush, Steve Forbes, Orrin Hatch, John McCain, and Alan Keyes. After viewing the debate, respondents' perceptions of candidate image changed, and candidate vote preferences also changed. Our results suggest that primary debate participation may have negative consequences for a campaign front-runner. This study also measures reactions to candidates' specific issue appeals and finds that appeals made by the large field of primary candidates vying for public attention—whom we label also-rans—tend to be evaluated more negatively by debate viewers than those appeals made by the better-known candidates. Finally, candidates who adopt the often employed debate strategy of attacking the front-runner might find that such a strategy is more successful if employed in moderation.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
The Harvard International Journal of Press/PoliticsHome page
K. L. Fridkin, P. J. Kenney, S. A. Gershon, and G. Serignese Woodall
Spinning Debates: The Impact of the News Media's Coverage of the Final 2004 Presidential Debate
International Journal of Press/Politics, January 1, 2008; 13(1): 29 - 51.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
American Behavioral ScientistHome page
J. W. Jarman
Political Affiliation and Presidential Debates: A Real-Time Analysis of the Effect of the Arguments Used in the Presidential Debates
American Behavioral Scientist, October 1, 2005; 49(2): 229 - 242.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
American Behavioral ScientistHome page
T. Robertson
A Perfect Storm: A Case Study Analysis of the Defeat of Tom Daschle by John Thune in the 2004 South Dakota Senate Race
American Behavioral Scientist, October 1, 2005; 49(2): 326 - 342.
[Abstract] [PDF]