Background behavior in live debates: The effects of the implicit ad hominem fallacy

Communication Reports

Volumn 19, Issue 1, 2006, Pages 57-69

  Seiter, John S ^a   Kinzer, Harold J ^a   Weger Jr , Harry ^b  

^a UTAH STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 33646352756     PISSN: 08934215     EISSN: 17451043     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/08934210600626856     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Andersen, P. A. (2004). Influential actions: Nonverbal communication and persuasion. In J. S. Seiter & R. H. Gass (Eds.), Perspectives on persuasion, social influence, and compliance gaining (pp. 165-180). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
2. Atkinson, M. (1984). Our master's voices: The language and body language of politics. New York: Methuen.
3. Bennett, A. (1981). Interruptions and the interpretation of conversation. Discourse Processes, 4, 171-188.
4. Benoit, W. L., McKinney, M. S., & Holbert, R. L. (2001). Beyond learning and persona: Extending the scope of presidential debate effects. Communication Monographs, 68, 259-273.
5. Burgoon, J. K., & LePoire, B. A. (1993). Effects of communication expectancies, actual communication, and expectancy disconfirmation on evaluations of communicators and their communication behavior. Human Communciation Research, 20, 67-96.
6. Chambliss, C. A., & Feeny, N. (1992). Effects of sex of subject, sex of interrupter, and topic of conversation on the perception of interruptions. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 75, 1235-1241.
7. Druckman, J. N. (2003). The Power of Television images: The First Kennedy-Nixon debate revisited. Journal of Politics, 65, 559-571.
8. Haugen, D. (2004, August 4). Thune accuses Daschle of ducking debates. The Associated Press State & Local Wire. Retrieved December 20, 2004, from Lexus/Nexus database.
9. Jamieson, K. H. (1988). Eloquence in an electronic age: The transformation of political speech making. New York: Oxford University Press.
10. Jamieson, K. H. (2000). Everything you think you know about politics. . .and why you're wrong. New York: Basic Books.
11. LaFrance, M. (1992). Gender and interruption: Individual infraction or violation of the social order? Psychology of Women Quarterly, 16, 497-512.
12. Levine, T. R., Anders, L. N., Banas, J., Baum, K. L., Endo, K., Hu, A. D. S., et al. (2000). Norms, expectations, and deception: A norm violation model of veracity judgments. Communication Monographs, 67, 123-137.
13. Luntz Research Companies (2004, October 1). Florida swing voters speak: Kerry swings the swing vote. Retrieved December 20, 2004, from http://www.luntz.com/recentfindings.htm
14. McCroskey, J. C., Hamilton, P. R., & Weiner, A. M. (1974). The effect of interaction behavior on source credibility, homophily, and interpersonal attraction. Human Communication Research, 1, 42-52.
15. Oakes, W. (1972). External validity and the use of real people as subjects. American Psychologist, 27, 959-962.
16. Pfau, M., & Kang, J. G. (1991). The impact of relational messages on candidate influence in televised political debates. Communication Studies, 42, 114-128.
17. Place, K. S., & Becker, J. A. (1991). The influence of pragmatic competence on the likability of grade-school children. Discourse Process, 14, 227-241.
18. Remland, M. (1982). The implicit ad hominem fallacy: Nonverbal displays of status in argumentative discourse. Journal of the American Forensic Association, 19, 79-86.
19. Robinson, L. P., & Reis, H. T. (1989). The effects of interruption, gender, and status on interpersonal perception. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 13, 141-153.
20. Rosenthal, R., & Rosnow, R. L. (1985). Contrast analysis: Focused comparisons in the analysis of variance. New York: Cambridge University Press.
21. Rubin, R. B., Palmgreen, P., & Sypher, H. E. (1994). Communication research measures: A sourcebook. New York: Guilford.
22. Schneider, W. (2000). Al Gore's problem. National Journal, 32, 3450.
23. Schrott, P. R., & Lanoue, D. J. (1992). How to win a televised debate: Candidate strategies and voter response in Germany, 1972-87. British Journal of Political Science, 22, 445-467.
24. Segrin, C. (1993). The effects of nonverbal behavior on outcomes of compliance-gaining attempts. Communication Studies, 44, 169-187.
25. Seiter, J. S. (1999). Does communicating nonverbal disagreement during an opponent's speech affect the credibility of the debater in the background? Psychological Reports, 84, 855-861.
26. Seiter, J. S. (2001). Silent derogation and perceptions of deceptiveness: Does communicating nonverbal disbelief during an opponent's speech affect perceptions of debaters' veracity? Communication Research Reports, 7, 203-209.
27. Seiter, J. S., Abraham, J. A., & Nakagama, B. T. (1998). Split-screen versus single-screenformats in televised debates: Does access to an opponent's nonverbal behaviors affect viewers' perceptions of a speaker's credibility? Perceptual and Motor Skills, 86, 491-497.
28. Seiter, J. S., & Weger, H., Jr. (2005). Audience perceptions of candidates' appropriateness as a function of nonverbal behaviors displayed during televised political debates. The Journal of Social Psychology, 145, 225-235.