Impression management in televised debates: The effect of background nonverbal behavior on audience perceptions of debaters' likeability

Communication Research Reports

Volumn 26, Issue 1, 2009, Pages 1-11

  Seiter, John S ^a   Weger, Harry ^b   Kinzer, Harold J ^a   Jensen, Andrea Sandry ^a  

^a UTAH STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA   (United States)

Author keywords

Debate; Impression Management; Liking; Nonverbal Communication; Person Perception

Indexed keywords

EID: 77953860720     PISSN: 08824096     EISSN: 17464099     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/08824090802636959     Document Type: Article

References (34)

1. Bennett, A., (1981). Interruptions and the interpretation of conversation. Discourse Processes, 4, 171–188.
2. Blankenship, J., (1990). Naming and name calling as acts of definition: Political campaigns and the 1988 presidential debates. In R., Trapp & J., Schuetz (Eds.), Perspectives on argumentation: Essays in honor of Wayne Brockriede (pp. 162–174). Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland.
3. Brown, P., & Levinson, S. C., (1978). Politeness: Some universals in language usage. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
4. 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.
5. Burgoon, M., & Siegel, J. T., (2004). Language expectancy theory: Insight to application. In J. S., Seiter & R. H., Gass (Eds.), Perspectives on persuasion, social influence, and compliance gaining (pp. 149–164). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
6. Chaiken, S., (1980). Heuristic versus systematic information processing and the use of source versus message cues in persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39, 752–766.
7. 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.
8. Cialdini, R. B., (2001). Influence: Science and practice (), 4th ed., Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
9. Dailey, W. O., Hinck, E. A., & Hinck, S. S., (2008). Politeness in presidential debates: Shaping political face in campaign debates from 1960 to 2004, New York: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
10. Dinzes, D., Cozzens, M. D., & Manross, G. G., (1994). The role of gender in attack ads: Revisiting negative political advertising. Communication Research Reports, 11, 67–75.
11. Goffman, E., (1959). The presentation of self in everyday life. Garden City, NY: Anchor/Doubleday.
12. Gordon, A., Shafie, D. M., & Crigler, A. N., (2003). Is negative advertising effective for female candidates? Harvard International Journal of Press Politics, 8, 35–53.
13. Klingle, R. S., (2004). Compliance gaining in medical contexts. In J. S., Seiter & R. H., Gass (Eds.), Perspectives on persuasion, social influence, and compliance gaining (pp. 289–316). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
14. LaFrance, M., (1992). Gender and interruption: Individual infraction or violation of the social order? Psychology of Women Quarterly, 16, 497–512.
15. Leathers, D. G., (1997). Successful nonverbal communication: Principles and applications (), 3rd ed., Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
16. Levine, T. R., Anders, L. N., Banas, J., Baum, K. L., Endo, K., et al. (2000). Norms, expectations, and deception: A norm violation model of veracity judgments. Communication Monographs, 67, 123–137.
17. Miller, W. E., & Shanks, J. M., (1996). The new American voter, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
18. Oliver, J. E., & Ha, S. E., (2007). Vote choice in suburban elections. American Political Science Review, 101, 393–408.
19. Pfau, M., & Kang, J. G., (1991). The impact of relational messages on candidate influence in televised political debates. Communication Studies, 42, 114–128.
20. Place, K. S., & Becker, J. A., (1991). The influence of pragmatic competence on the likability of grade-school children. Discourse Processes, 14, 227–241.
21. Postman, N., (1986). Amusing ourselves to death: Public discourse in the age of show business, New York: Penguin.
22. Reysen, S., (2005). Construction of a new scale: The Reysen Likability Scale. Social Behavior and Personality, 33, 201–208.
23. Robinson, L. F., & Reis, H. T., (1989). The effects of interruption, gender, and status on interpersonal perception. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 13, 141–153.
24. Rosenthal, R., Rosnow, R. L., & Rubin, D. B., (2000). Contrasts and effect sizes in behavioral research: A correlational approach, Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
25. Roskos-Ewoldsen, D. R., & Fazio, R. H., (1992). The accessibility of source likability as a determinant of persuasion. Personality and Social Psychological Bulletin, 18, 19–25.
26. Schlenker, B. R., (1980). Impression management, Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole.
27. 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.
28. 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.
29. 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 behaviors affect viewers' perceptions of a speaker's credibility? Perceptual and Motor Skills, 86, 491–497.
30. Seiter, J. S., Kinzer, H. J., & Weger, H., (2006). Background behavior in live debates: The effects of the implicit Ad Hominem Fallacy. Communication Reports, 19, 57–69.
31. 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.
32. Stone, V. A., (1969). The likability and self-interest of the source in attitude change. Journalism Quarterly, 46, 61–68.
33. Wattenberg, M. N., (2004). Elections: Personal popularity in U.S. presidential elections. Presidential Studies Quarterly, 34, 143–145.
34. Zajonc, R. B., (1968). Attitude effects of mere exposure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology Monograph Supplement, 9 (Pt. 2), 1–28.