The rivalry of nonverbal cues on the perception of politicians by television viewers

Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media

Volumn 53, Issue 2, 2009, Pages 262-279

  Haumer, Florian ^a   Donsbach, Wolfgang ^a  

^a DRESDEN UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 68249114509     PISSN: 08838151     EISSN: 15506878     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/08838150902907918     Document Type: Article

References (56)

1. Adatto, K. (1990). Sound bite democracy: Network evening news presidential campaign coverage, 1968 and 1988. Research paper R-2, Joan Shorenstein Barone Center for Press, Politics, and Public Policy, Harvard University.
2. Argyle, M. (2002). Körpersprache & kommunikation. Das handbuch zur nonverbalen kommu-nikation. Paderborn: Junferman.
3. Asch, S. E. (1955). Social psychology. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall Inc.
4. Babad, E. (1999). Preferential treatment in television interviewing: Evidence from nonverbal behavior. Political Communication, 16(3), 337-358.
5. Baum, M. A. (2005). Talking the vote: Why presidential candidates hit the talk show circuit. American Journal of Political Science, 44, 213-234.
6. Brettschneider, F. (2002). Spitzenkandidaten und wahlerfolg. Personalisierung-kompetenz- parteien. Ein internationaler vergleich. Wiesbaden: Westdeutscher Verlag.
7. Brosius, H.-B. (1995). Alltagsrationalität in der nachrichtenrezeption. Ein modell zur wahrnehmung und verarbeitung von nachrichteninhalten. Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag.
8. Brown J. D., Novick, N. J., & Kelley, A. (1992). When Gulliver travels: Social context, psychological closeness, and self-appraisals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62, 717-727.
9. Bucy, E. P., & Newhagen, J. E. (1999). The micro- and macrodrama of politics on television: Effects of media format on candidate evaluations. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 43(2), 193-210.
10. Burgoon, J. K., Birk, T., & Pfau, M. (1990). Nonverbal behaviours, persuasion and credibility. Human Communication Research, 17, 140-169.
11. Campbell, A., Converse, P. E., Miller, W. E., & Stokes, D. E. (1960). The American voter. New York: Wiley.
12. Cavanaugh, J. (1995). Media effects on voters: A panel study of the 1992 presidential election. University Press of America.
13. Coleman, R., & Banning, S. (2006). Network TV news' affective framing of the presidential candidates: evidence for a second-level agenda-setting through visual framing. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 83(2), 313-328.
14. Coleman, R., & Wu, D. (2006). More than words alone: Incorporating broadcasters' nonverbal communication into the stages of crisis coverage theory - Evidence from September 11th. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 50(1), 1-17.
15. Conover, P. J. (1981). Political cues and the perception of candidates. American Politics Quarterly, 9, 427-448.
16. Davis, S. (1999). The effects of audience reaction shots and attitudes toward controversial issues. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 43, 476-491.
17. DePaulo, B. M., & Friedman, H. S. (1997). Nonverbal communication. In D. T. Gilbert, S. T. Fiske, & G. Lindzey (Eds.), Handbook of social psychology, (4th ed., pp. 3-40). New York: McGraw-Hill.
18. Diamond, E., McKay, M., & Silverman, R. (1993): Pop goes politics: New media, interactive formats, and the 1992 presidential campaign. American Behavioral Scientist, 37, 257-261.
19. Donsbach, W., & Jandura, O. (2003). Chances and effects of authenticity. Candidates of the German federal election in TV news. Harvard International Journal of Press/Politics, 8(1), 49-65.
20. Duck, S. W., & Baggaley, J. (1975). Audience reaction and its effect on perceived expertise. Communication Research, 2, 79-85.
21. Festinger, L. (1954). A theory of social comparison processes. Human Relations, 7, 117-140.
22. Graber, D. (1984). Processing the news. How people tame the information tide. New York & London: Longman.
23. Granberg, D., Kasmer, J., & Nanneman, T. (1988). An empirical examination of two theories of political perception. Western Political Quarterly, 41, 29-46.
24. Hylton, C. (1971). Intra-audience effects: Observable audience response. Journal of Communication, 21, 253-265.
25. Kaase, M. (1994). Is there personalization in politics? Candidates and voting behavior in Germany. International Political Science Review, 15, 211-230.
26. Kahneman, D., Slovic, P., & Tversky, A. (1982). Judgement under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
27. Keeter, S. (1987). The illusion of intimacy. Television and the role of candidate personal qualities in voter choice. Public Opinion Quarterly, 51, 344-358.
28. Kelley, H. H. (1952). The two functions of reference groups. In G. E. Swanson, T. M. Newcomb, & E. L. Hartley (Eds.), Readings in social psychology (pp. 410-414). New York: Holt.
29. Kempter, G., & Möller, C. (2000). Beurteilung einzelner stimuli des ausdrucksverhaltens ohne ihre entsprechenden kontext- und begleitmerkmale. Zeitschrift für Sozialpsychologie, 31 (2), 102-112.
30. Kepplinger, H. M. (1980). Optische kommentierung in der fernsehberichterstattung über den Bundestagswahlkampf 1976. In Thomas Ellwein (Ed.), Politikfeld-analysen 1979 (pp. 163- 179). Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag.
31. Kepplinger, H.-M., Brosius, H.-B., & Dahlem, S. (1994). Wie das Fernsehen die Wahlen beeinflusst. Theoretische Modelle und empirische Analysen. München: Fischer.
32. Kepplinger, H.-M., Brosius, H.-B., & Heine, N. (1987). Der einfluss nonverbaler verhaltensweisen auf die personenwahrnehmung in fernsehinterviews. In Hans Matthias Kepplinger (Ed.), Darstellungseffekte. Experimentelle untersuchungen zur wirkung von pressefotos und fernse-hfilmen (pp. 57-91). Freiburg, München: Alber.
33. Kinder, D. R. (1986). Presidential character revisited. In Richard R. Lau & David O. Sears (Eds.), Political cognition. The 19th annual Carnegie symposium on cognition (pp. 233- 255). Hillsdale, New York: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
34. Lippman, W. (1922). Public opinion. New York: Harcourt, Brace & Comp.
35. Maurer, M., & Kepplinger, H.-M. (2003). Warum die macht der fernsehbilder wächst. Verbale und visuelle informationen in den fernsehnachrichten vor den bundestagswahlen 1998 und 2002. In Christina Holtz-Bacha (Ed.), Die massenmedien im wahlkampf. Die bun-destagswahl 2002 (pp. 82-97). Wiesbaden: Westdeutscher Verlag.
36. Mehrabian, A., & Ferris, S. R. (1967). Inference of attitudes from nonverbal communication in two channels. Journal of Consulting Psychology, 31, 248-252.
37. Mehrabian, A. (2007). Nonverbal communication. Chicago: Aldine Publishing Company.
38. Nabi, R. L., & Hendriks A. (2003). The persuasive effect of host and audience reaction shots in television talk shows. Journal of Communication, 53, 527-543.
39. Newman, B. I. (1994). The marketing of the president: political marketing as campaign strategy. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
40. Nimmo, D. D., & Savage, R. L. (1976). Candidates and their images. Concepts, methods, and findings. Santa Monica: Goodyear.
41. Ostertag, M. (1991). Zum wirkungspotential nichtsprachlicher Äußerungen in politischen sendungen. Der einfluss offensiver und defensiver verhaltensstrategien auf das erschein-ungsbild von politikern und journalisten in fernsehinterviews. Koblenz: Diss.
42. Patterson, T. E. (1993). Out of order. New York: Knopf.
43. Patterson, T. E. (1995). We the people: A concise introduction to American politics. New York: McGraw-Hill.
44. Reinemann, C., & Wilke, J. (2007). It's the debates, stupid! How the introduction of televised debates changed the portrayal of chancellor candidates in the German press, 1949-2005. The Harvard International Journal of Press/Politics, 12(4), 92-111.
45. 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.
46. 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.
47. 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, 18(4), 334-344.
48. Seiter, J. S., Abraham, J. A., & Nakagama, B. T. (1998). Split-screen versus single-screen formats in televised debates: Does access to an opponent's nonverbal behaviours affect viewers' perceptions of a speaker's credibility? Perceptual and Motor Skills, 86, 491-497.
49. Shoemaker, P. J., & Reese S. D. (1991). Mediating the message. Theories of influence on mass media contents. New York, London: Longman.
50. Stapel, D., & Koomen, W. (2000). Distinctness of others, mutability of selves: Their impact on self-evaluation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79, 1068-1087.
51. Stewart, M. C., & Clarke, H. D. (1992). The (un)importance of party leaders: Leader images and party choice in the 1987 British election. Journal of Politics, 54, 447-470.
52. Suls, J. M., & Wheeler, L. (2000). Handbook of social comparison: Theory and research. New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers.
53. Tversky, A., & Kahneman D. (1973). Availability: A heuristic for judging frequency and probability. Cognitive Psychology, 5, 207-232.
54. Wilke, J., & Reinemann C. (2000). Kanzlerkandidaten in der Wahlkampfberichterstattung 1949-1998. Köln, Weimar, Wien: Böhlau Verlag.
55. Wills, T. A. (1981). Downward comparison principles in social psychology. Psychological Bulletin, 90, 245-271.
56. Zubayr, C., & Gerhard, H. (2007). Fernsehgewohnheiten und fernsehreichweiten im jahr 2006. Tendenzen im Zuschauerverhalten. Media Perspektiven, o.Jg., (4), 187-199.