Interview effects: Theory and evidence for the impact of televised political interviews on viewer attitudes

Communication Theory

Volumn 20, Issue 3, 2010, Pages 323-347

  Ben Porath, E N ^a  

^a SSRS/Social Science Research Solutions   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

MASS MEDIA; POLITICS; PUBLIC ATTITUDE; TELEVISION;

UNITED STATES;

EID: 77954847852     PISSN: 10503293     EISSN: 14682885     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-2885.2010.01365.x     Document Type: Article

References (71)

1. Atwood L E. How newsmen and readers perceive each others' story preferences. Journalism Quarterly 1970, 47:296-302.
2. Auer J J. The counterfeit debates. The great debates: Background, Perspective, effects 1962, 142-150. Kraus S. (Ed.), (pp., Bloomington, Indiana University Press
3. Benoit W L, Wells W T. Candidates in conflict: Persuasive attack and defense in the 1992 presidential debates. 1996, Tuscaloosa, AL, University of Alabama Press
4. Ben-Porath E N. Internal fragmentation of the news: Television news in dialogical format and its consequences for journalism. Journalism Studies 2007, 8:414-431.
5. Brooks D J, Geer J. Beyond negativity: The effects of incivility on the electorate. American Journal of Political Science 2007, 51:1-16.
6. Brown P, Levinson S C. Politeness: Some universals in language usage 1987, New York, Cambridge University Press
7. Clayman S E. Tribune of the people: Maintaining the legitimacy of aggressive journalism. Media, Culture & Society 2002, 24:197-216.
8. Clayman S E. Arenas of interaction in the mediated public sphere. Poetics 2004, 32:29-49..
9. Clayman S E, Heritage J. The news interview: Journalists and public figures on the air 2002, Cambridge, UK, Cambridge University Press
10. Cohen A A. Answers without questions: A comparative analysis of television news interviews. European Journal of Communication 1989, 4:435-451.
11. Cook T, Gronke P, Ratliff J. Disdaining the media: Americans' changing attitudes towards the news. 2000, Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association,, Washington, DC
12. Elving R D. Brighter lights, wider windows: Presenting Congress in the 1990s. Congress, the press, and the public 1994, 171-206. Mann T EOrnstein N J. In:, (Eds.), (pp., Washington, DC, American Enterprise Institute and the Brookings Institution
13. Finlayson A. The problem of the political interview. Political Quarterly 2001, 72:335-344.
14. Forgette R, Morris J S. High-conflict television news and public opinion. Political Research Quarterly 2006, 59:447-456.
15. Funk C L. Process performance: Public reaction to legislative policy debate. What is it about government that Americans dislike? 2001, Hibbing J RTheiss-Morse E. (Eds.), New York, Cambridge University Press
16. Goffman E. Behavior in public places: Notes on the social organization of gatherings 1963, New York, Free Press of Glencoe
17. Goldstein S B. Construction and validation of a conflict communication scale. Journal of Applied Social Psychology 1999, 29:1803-1832.
18. Goody E N. Towards a theory of questions. Questions and politeness: Strategies in social interaction 1978, 17-43. Goody E N. (Ed.), (pp., Cambridge, UK, Cambridge University Press
19. Gopnik A. Read all about it. New Yorker 1994, 70(41):84-102.
20. Grice H P. Studies in the way of words 1975/1989, Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press
21. Harris S. Interviewers' questions in broadcast interviews. Belfast Working Papers in Language and Linguistics 1986, 8:50-85.
22. Heritage J. The limits of questioning: Negative imperatives and hostile question content. Journal of Pragmatics 2002, 34:1427-1466.
23. Heritage J, Greatbatch D. On the institutional character of institutional talk. Talk and social structure: Ethnomethodology and conversation analysis 1991, 44-70. Zimmerman D H, Boden D. (Eds.), (pp., Berkeley, CA, University of California Press
24. Jamieson K H. Dirty politics: Deception, distraction, and democracy 1993, New York, Oxford University Press
25. Jamieson K H, Falk E. Continuity and change in civility in the House. Polarized politics 2000, 96-108. Bond J R, Fleisher R. (Eds.), (pp., Washington, DC, Congressional Quarterly Press
26. Jamieson K H, Hardy B W, Romer D. The effectiveness of the press in serving the needs of American democracy. Institutions of American democracy: A republic divided 2007, 21-51. In The Annenberg Democracy Project (Eds.), (pp., New York, Oxford University Press
27. Jucker A H. News interviews: A pragmalinguistic analysis 1986, Philadelphia, PA, John Benjamins Publishing Company
28. Kaid L L, Downs V C, Ragan S. Political argumentation and violations of audience expectations: An analysis of the Bush-Rather encounter. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media 1990, 34:1-15.
29. Kay J, Borchers T A. "Children in a sandbox" : Reaction to the vice presidential debate. The 1992 presidential debates in focus 1994, 99-108. Carlin D B, McKinney M S. (Eds.), (pp., Westport, CT, Praeger
30. Kennedy R. Civility in the House of Representatives. American Prospect 1998, 9(41):84-91.
31. Kesler C R. Civility and citizenship in the American founding. Civility and citizenship in liberal democratic societies 1992, 57-73. Banfield E C. (Ed.), (pp., New York, Paragon House
32. Keyes C L M. Social civility in the United States. Sociological Inquiry 2002, 72:393-408.
33. Kohut A. Public support for the watchdogs is fading. Columbia Journalism Review 2001, 40(1):52.
34. Kohut A, Toth R C. The central conundrum: How can the people like what they distrust? Harvard International Journal of Press/Politics 1998, 3:110-117.
35. Koshik I. Wh-questions as challenges. Discourse Studies 2003, 5:51-77.
36. Lamoureux E R, Entrekin H S, Mckinney M S. Debating the debates. The 1992 Presidential debates in focus 1994, 55-67. Carlin D B, Mckinney M S, (Eds.), (pp., Westport, CT, Praeger
37. Leech G. Principles of pragmatics 1983, London, Longman
38. Leech N L, Barrett K C, Morgan G A. SPSS for intermediate statistics: Use and interpretation 2005, Mahwah, NJ, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates
39. Liebes T. "Look me straight in the eye" : The political discourse of authenticity, spontaneity, and sincerity. Communication Review 2001, 4:499-510.
40. Matthews C. Now, let me tell you what I really think 2001, New York, Free Press
41. McConnell B. Russert: Old school rules. Broadcasting & Cable 2004, 134(36):8.
42. Merritt D, McCombs M E. The two w's of journalism: The why and what of public affairs reporting 2004, Mahwah, NJ, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates
43. Miller J M, Krosnick J. News media impact on the ingredients of presidential evaluations: Politically knowledgeable citizens are guided by a trusted source. American Journal of Political Science 2000, 44:301-315.
44. Moy P, Pfau M. With malice toward all? The media and public confidence in democratic institutions 2000, Westport, CT, Praeger
45. Mutz D C, Reeves B. The new videomalaise: Effects of televised incivility on political trust. American Political Science Review 2005, 99:1-15.
46. Nylund M, Kroon A, Ekström M. News from the interview society: An introduction. News from the interview society 2006, Ekström M, Kroon A, Nylund M. (Eds.), Göteborg, Sweden, Nordicom Press
47. Olson K M. Exploiting the tension between the news media's "objective" and adversarial roles: The role imbalance attack and its use of the implied audience. Communication Quarterly 1994, 42:36-56.
48. Papacharissi Z. Democracy online: Civility, politeness, and the democratic potential of online political discussion groups. New Media & Society 2004, 6:259-283.
49. Patterson T E. The vanishing voter: Public involvement in the age of uncertainty 2002, New York, Vintage Books
50. Peck D L. Civility: A contemporary context for a meaningful historical concept. Sociological Inquiry 2002, 72:358-375.
51. Terror coverage boost news media's images: But military censorship backed. 2001, http://people-press.org/reports/display.php3?ReportID=143, Pew Research Center for People and the Press, Retrieved on July 18, 2006, from:
52. Public more critical of press, but goodwill persists: Online newspaper readership countering print losses. 2005a, http://people-press.org/reports/pdf/248.pdf, Pew Research Center for People and the Press, Retrieved on July 18, 2006, from:
53. Alito viewed positively, but Libby takes a toll: Bush ratings fall further. 2005b, http://people-press.org/reports/print.php3?PageID=1015, Pew Research Center for People and the Press, Retrieved on July 18, 2006, from:
54. Online papers modestly boost newspaper readership: Maturing Internet news audience broader than deep. 2006, http://people-press.org/reports/display.php3?ReportID=282, Pew Research Center for People and the Press, Retrieved on September 25, 2006 from:
55. Phillips T, Smith P. Everyday incivility: Towards a benchmark. Sociological Review 2003, 51:85-108.
56. Poindexter P M, Heider D, McCombs M. Watchdog or good neighbor?: The public's expectations of local news. Harvard International Journal of Press/Politics 2006, 11:77-88.
57. Rawls J. Political liberalism 1993, New York, Columbia University Press
58. Reeves B, Nass C I. The media equation: How people treat computers, television, and new media like real people and places 1996, Stanford, CA, Cambridge University Press
59. Rendle-Short J. Neutralism and adversarial challenges in the political news interview. Discourse and Communication 2007, 1:387-406.
60. Rosenstiel T. Yakety-yak: The lost art of interviewing. Columbia Journalism Review 1995, 33. http://backissues.cjrarchives.org/year/95/1/interviewing.asp, Retrieved November 27, 2006 from:
61. Roth A L. Who makes the news? Descriptions of television news interviewees' public personae. Media, Culture and Society 1998, 20:79-107.
62. Schudson M. The power of news 1995, Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press
63. Schudson M. Why conversation is not the soul of democracy. Critical Studies in Mass Communication 1997, 14:297-309.
64. Searle J R. Indirect speech acts. Syntax and semantics, 3: Speech acts 1975, 59-82. Cole PMorgan J L. (Eds.),, (pp., New York, Academic Press
65. Shils E. Civility and civil society. Civility and citizenship in liberal democratic societies 1992, 1-15. Banfield E C. (Ed.), (pp., New York, Paragon House
66. Simmel G. The metropolis and mental life. Simmel on culture: Selected writings 1997, 174-185. Frisby DFeatherstone M. (Eds.),, (pp., London, Sage
67. Smith T J, Lichter S R. What the people want from the press 1997, Louis Harris and Associates, Inc, Washington, DC, Center for Media and Public Affairs
68. Thunder D. A Rawlsian argument against the duty of civility. American Journal of Political Science 2006, 50:676-690.
69. Tsfati Y. Does audience skepticism of the media matter in agenda-setting? Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media 2003, 47:157-176.
70. Tsfati Y, Cappella J N. Do people watch what they do not trust? Exploring the association between news media skepticism and exposure. Communication Research 2003, 30:1-26.
71. Williams B, Delli Carpini M X. Monica and Bill all the time and everywhere. American Behavioral Scientist 2004, 47:1208-1230.