Political communication

The Handbook of Communication Science

Volumn , Issue , 2010, Pages 437-452

  Benoit, William L ^a   Holbert, R Lance ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI   (United States)

^b OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 78649728077     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.4135/9781412982818.n25     Document Type: Chapter

References (99)

1. Althaus, S., & Tewksbury, D. (2007). How should we measure media exposure?http://www.jour.unr.edu/pcr/1703_2007_autumn/invitation.html
2. Beck, P. A. Dalton, R. J. Greene, S. Huckfeldt, R. The social calculus of voting: Interpersonal, media, and organi-zational influences on presidential choices. American Political Science Review 96 57-73. (2002).
3. Bennett, W. L. The uncivic culture: Communication, identity, and the rise of lifestyle politics. PS: Political Science & Politics 31 741-761. (1998).
4. Bennett, W. L. Manheim, J. B. The one-step flow of communication. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 608 213-232. (2006). doi:10.1177/0002716206292266 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0002716206292266
5. Berelson, B. R., Lazarsfeld, P. F., & McPhee, W. N. (1954). Voting: A study of opinion formation in a presidential campaign. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
6. Berger, C. R. Calabrese, R. J. Some explorations in initial interaction and beyond: Toward a developmental theory of interpersonal communication. Human Communication Research 1 99-112. (1975). doi:10.1111/j.1468-2958.1975.tb00258.x http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2958.1975.tb00258.x
7. Bohman, J., & Rehg, W. (Eds.). (1997). Deliberative democracy. Cambridge: MIT Press.
8. Bormann, E. Fantasy and rhetorical vision: The rhetorical criticism of social reality. Quarterly Journal of Speech 58 396-407. (1972). doi:10.1080/00335637209383138 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00335637209383138
9. Boyle, M. P. Schmierbach, M. Armstrong, C. L. McLeod, D. M. Shah, D. V. Pan, Z. Information seeking and emotional reactions to the September 11th terrorist attacks. Journalism & Mass Communi-cation Quarterly 81 155-167. (2004). doi:10.1177/107769900408100111 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/107769900408100111
10. Chaffee, S. H., & Berger, C. R. (1987). What communication scientists do. In C. R. Berger & S. H. Chaffee (Eds.), Handbook of communi-cation science (pp. 99-122). Newbury Park, CA: Sagedoi:10.4135/9781412982818 http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781412982818.
11. Chaffee, S. H., & Hochheimer, J. L. (1985). The beginnings of political communication research in the United States: Origins of the “limited effects” model. In M. Gurevitch & M. R. Levy (Eds.), Mass communication review yearbook (Vol. 5, pp. 75-104). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
12. Chaffee, S. H. Metzger, M. J. The end of mass communication? Mass Communi-cation & Society 4 365-379. (2001). doi:10.1207/S15327825MCS0404_3 http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/S15327825MCS0404_3
13. Chong, D. Druckman, J. N. Framing theory. Annual Review of Political Science 10 103-126. (2007). doi:10.1146/annurev.polisci.10.072805.103054 http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev.polisci.10.072805.103054
14. Cohen, B. C. (1963). The press and foreign policy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
15. Delia, J. G. (1987). Communication research: A history. In C. R. Berger & S. H. Chaffee (Eds.), The handbook of communication science (pp. 20-98). Newbury Park, CA: Sagedoi:10.4135/9781412982818 http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781412982818.
16. Downs, A. (1957). An economic theory of democracy. New York: Harper & Row.
17. Englis, B. G. Solomon, M. R. To be or not to be: Lifestyle imagery, reference groups, and the clustering of America. Journal of Advertising 24 13-28. (1995).
18. Entman, R. Framing: Toward a clarification of a fractured paradigm. Journal of Communication 43 51-58. (1993). doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.1993.tb01304.x http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.1993.tb01304.x
19. Eveland, W. P., Jr. Hayes, A. F. Shah, D. V. Kwak, N. Understanding the relationship between communication and political knowledge: A model comparison approach using panel data. Political Communication 22 423-446. (2005). doi:10.1080/10584600500311345 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10584600500311345
20. Eveland, W. P., Jr. Marton, K. Seo, K. M. Moving beyond “just the facts”: The influence of online news on the content and structure of public affairs knowledge. Communication Research 31 82-108. (2004). doi:10.1177/0093650203260203 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0093650203260203
21. Fisher, W. R. (1987). Human communication as narration: Toward a philosophy of reason, value, and action. Columbia: University of South Carolina Press.
22. Fiske, S. T. Thinking is for doing: Portraits of social cognition from daguerreotype to Laserphoto. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology 63 877-889. (1992). doi:10.1037/0022-3514.63.6.877 http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.63.6.877
23. Gamson, W. A., & Modigliani, A. (1987). The changing culture of affirmative action. In R. G. Braungart & M. M. Braungart (Eds.), Research in political sociology (Vol. 3, pp. 137-177). Greenwich, CT: JAI.
24. Gans, H. J. (1979). Deciding what’s news: A study of CBS Evening News, NBC Nightly News, Newsweek and Time. New York: Vintage.
25. Gitlin, T. Media sociology: The dominant paradigm. Theory and Society 6 205-253. (1978). doi:10.1007/BF01681751 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF01681751
26. Goffman, E. (1974). Frame analysis. New York: Harper & Row.
27. Graber, D. A. Smith, J. M. Political communication faces the 21st century. Journal of Communication 55 479-507. (2005). doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2005.tb02682.x http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2005.tb02682.x
28. Guttman, N. Bringing the mountain to the public: Dilemmas and contradictions in the procedures of public deliberation initiatives that aim to get “ordinary citizens” to deliberate policy issues. Communication Theory 17 411-438. (2007). doi:10.1111/j.1468-2885.2007.00305.x http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2885.2007.00305.x
29. Habermas, J. Political communication in media society: Does democracy still enjoy an epistemic dimension? The impact of normative theory on empirical research. Communication Theory 16 411-426. (2006). doi:10.1111/j.1468-2885.2006.00280.x http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2885.2006.00280.x
30. Hansen, G. J. Benoit, W. L. Communication forms as predictors of issue knowledge in presidential campaigns: A meta-analytic assessment. Mass Communi-cation & Society 10 189-210. (2007). doi:10.1080/15205430701265711 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15205430701265711
31. Herman, E. S., & Chomsky, N. (1988). Manufacturing consent: The political economy of the mass media. New York: Pantheon.
32. Holbert, R. L. Benoit, W. L. Hansen, G. J. Wen, W.-C. The role of communi-cation in the formation of an issue-based citizenry. Communication Monographs 69 296-310. (2002). doi:10.1080/03637750216549 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03637750216549
33. Holbrook, T. M. (1996). Do campaigns matter?Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. doi:10.4135/9781452243825 http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781452243825
34. Huckfeldt, R., & Sprague, J. (1995). Citizens, politics, and social communication: Information and influence in an election campaign. New York: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511664113 http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511664113
35. Huspek, M. Symposium: Habermas and deliberative democracy: Introductory remarks. Communication Theory 17 329-332. (2007). doi:10.1111/j.1468-2885.2007.00298.x http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2885.2007.00298.x
36. Iyengar, S. (1991). Is anyone responsible? How television frames political issues. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
37. Iyengar, S., & Kinder, D. R. (1987). News that matters: Television and American opinion. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
38. James, W. (1983). The principles of psychology. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. (Original work published 1890)
39. Johnston, R., Hagen, M. G., & Jamieson, K. H. (2000). The 2000 presidential election and the foundations of party politics. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
40. Katz, E. Communication research since Lazarsfeld Public Opinion Quarterly 51 S25-S45. (1987).
41. Katz, E., & Lazarsfeld, P. F. (1955). Personal influence: The part played by people in the flow of mass communications. New York: Free Press.
42. Keck, K. L. Samp, J. A. The dynamic nature of goals and message production as revealed in a sequential analysis of conflict interactions. Communication Research 33 27-47. (2007).
43. Keller, K. L. Lehmann, D. R. Brands and branding: Research findings and future priorities. Marketing Science 25 740-759. (2006). doi:10.1287/mksc.1050.0153 http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mksc.1050.0153
44. Kenski, K. Stroud, N. J. Connections between Internet use and political efficacy, knowledge, and participation. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media 50 173-192. (2006).
45. Kim, J. Wyatt, R. O. Katz, E. News, talk, opinion, participation: The part played by conversation in deliberative democracy. Political Communication 16 361-386. (1999). doi:10.1080/105846099198541 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/105846099198541
46. Kiousis, S. McCombs, M. E. Agenda setting effects and attitude strength: Political figures during the 1996 presidential election. Communication Research 31 36-57. (2004). doi:10.1177/0093650203260205 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0093650203260205
47. Kitchen, P. J. Brignell, J. Li, T. Jones, G. S. The emergence of IMC: A theoretical perspective. Journal of Advertising Research 44 19-30. (2004). doi:10.1017/S0021849904040048 http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0021849904040048
48. Klapper, J. T. (1960). The effects of mass communication: An analysis of research on the effectiveness and limitations of mass media in influencing the opinions, values, and behavior of their audiences. Glencoe, IL: Free Press.
49. Krosnick, J. A. Kinder, D. R. Altering the foundations of support for the president through priming. American Political Science Review 84 497-512. (1990).
50. Lakoff, G. (2002). Moral politics: How liberals and conservatives think. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
51. Lazarsfeld, P. F., Berelson, B., & Gaudet, H. (1948). The people’s choice: How the voter makes up his mind in a presidential campaign (2nd ed.). New York: Columbia University Press.
52. Lazarsfeld, P. F., & Merton, R. (1960). Mass media, popular taste, and organized social action. In W. Schramm (Ed.), Mass communications (2nd ed., pp. 492-512). Urbana: University of Illinois Press. (Original work published 1948)
53. Levy, S. J. (1999). Brands, consumers, symbols, and research: Sidney J. Levy on marketing. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sagedoi:10.4135/9781452231372 http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781452231372.
54. Maguire, K. C.“Will it ever end?” A (re)examination of uncertainty in college student long-distance dating relationships. Communication Quarterly 55 415-432. (2007). doi:10.1080/01463370701658002 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01463370701658002
55. McChesney, R. W. (2000). Rich media, poor democracy: Communication politics in dubious times. New York: New Press.
56. McCombs, M. (2004). Setting the agenda: The mass media and public opinion. Cambridge, UK: Polity.
57. McCombs, M.A look at agenda setting: past, present, and future. Journalism Studies 6 543-557. (2005). doi:10.1080/14616700500250438 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14616700500250438
58. McCombs, M. E. Shaw, D. L. The agenda setting function of the mass media. Public Opinion Quarterly 36 176-187. (1972). doi:10.1086/267990 http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/267990
59. McGuire, M. J. (1989). Theoretical foundations of campaigns. In R. E. Rice & C. K. Atkin (Eds.), Public communication campaigns (2nd ed., pp. 43-65). Newbury Park, CA: Sagedoi:10.4135/9781452233260 http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781452233260.
60. McLeod, J. M. Scheufele, D. A. Moy, P. Community, communication, and participation: The role of mass media and interpersonal discussion in local political participation. Political Communication 16 315-336. (1999). doi:10.1080/105846099198659 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/105846099198659
61. McLeod, J. M. Scheufele, D. A. Moy, P. Horowitz, E. Holbert, R. L. Zhang, W., et al.Understanding deliberation: The effects of discussion networks on participation in a public forum. Communi-cation Research 26 743-774. (1999). doi:10.1177/009365099026006005 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/009365099026006005
62. McLuhan, M. (1964). Understanding media: The extensions of man. New York: Mentor.
63. Meyers, D. E. Schvaneveldt, R. W. Facilitation in recognizing pairs of words: Evidence of a dependence between retrieval operations. Journal of Experimental Psychology 90 227-234. (1971). doi:10.1037/h0031564 http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0031564
64. Meyrowitz, J. (1985). No sense of place: The impact of electronic media on social behavior. New York: Oxford University Press.
65. Meyrowitz, J. (1994). Medium theory. In D. Crowley & D. Mitchell (Eds.), Communication theory today (pp. 50-77). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
66. Michman, R. D., & Mazze, E. M. (2006). The affluent consumer: Marketing and selling the affluent lifestyle. Westport, CT: Praeger.
67. Miller, G. A. The magic number seven plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity to process information. Psycho-logical Review 63 81-97. (1956).
68. Moy, P. Gastil, J. Predicting deliberative conversation: The impact of discussion networks, media use, and political cognitions. Political Communi-cation 23 443-460. (2006). doi:10.1080/10584600600977003 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10584600600977003
69. Nisbett, M. C. Scheufele, D. A. Political talk as catalyst for online citizenship. Journalism & Mass Communi-cation Quarterly 81 877-896. (2004). doi:10.1177/107769900408100410 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/107769900408100410
70. Pan, Z. Shen, L. Paek, H. Sun, Y. Mobilizing political talk in a presidential campaign: An examination of campaign effects in a deliberative framework. Communication Research 33 315-345. (2006). doi:10.1177/0093650206291478 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0093650206291478
71. Petrocik, J. R. Issue ownership in presidential elections, with a 1980 case study. American Journal of Political Science 40 825-850. (1996). doi:10.2307/2111797 http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2111797
72. Petrocik, J. R. Benoit, W. L. Hansen, G. L. Issue ownership and presi-dential campaigning, 1952-2000. Political Science Quarterly 118 599-626. (2003-2004).
73. Pfau, M. The mass media and American politics: A review essay. Western Political Quarterly 42 173-186. (1988). doi:10.2307/448663 http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/448663
74. Popkin, S. L. (1994). The reasoning voter: Communication and persuasion in presi-dential campaigns (2nd ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
75. Price, V. (1992). Communication concepts 4: Public opinion. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
76. Price, V. Cappella, J. N. Nir, L. Does disagreement contribute to more deliberative opinion? Political Communi-cation 19 95-112. (2002). doi:10.1080/105846002317246506 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/105846002317246506
77. Price, V., & Tewksbury, D. (1995). News values and public opinion: A theoretical account of media priming and framing. Presented at the annual meeting of the International Communication Association, Albuquerque, NM.
78. Putnam, R. D. (2000). Bowling alone: The collapse and revival of American community. New York: Simon & Schuster.
79. Rheingold, H. (2002). Smart mobs: The next social revolution. Cambridge, MA: Perseus.
80. Roloff, M. E. (1987). Communication and conflict. In C. R. Berger & S. H. Chaffee (Eds.), Handbook of communication science (pp. 484-536). Newbury Park, CA: Sagedoi:10.4135/9781412982818 http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781412982818.
81. Romer, D., Kenski, K., Winneg, K., Adasiewicz, C., & Jamieson, K. H. (2006). Capturing campaign dynamics 2000 & 2004: The national Annenberg election survey. Philadelphia: University of Penn-sylvania Press.
82. Rosenthal, R. (1991). Replication in behavioral research. In J. W. Neuliep (Ed.), Replication in the social sciences (pp. 1-30). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
83. Roskos-Ewoldsen, D. R., Klinger, M. R., & Roskos-Ewoldsen, B. (2007). Media priming: A meta-analysis. In R. W. Preiss, B. M. Gayle, N. Burrel, M. Allen, & J. Bryant (Eds.), Mass media effects research: Advances through meta-analysis (pp. 53-81). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
84. Roskos-Ewoldsen, D., Roskos-Ewoldsen, B., & Carpentier, F. R. D. (2002). Media priming: A synthesis. In J. Bryant & D. Zillman (Eds.), Media effects: Advances in theory and research (pp. 97-120). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
85. Scheufele, D. A. Agenda-setting, priming, and framing revisited: Another look at cognitive effects of political communication. Mass Communication & Society 3 297-316. (2000). doi:10.1207/S15327825MCS0323_07 http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/S15327825MCS0323_07
86. Scheufele, D. A. Shah, D. V. Personality strength and social capital: The role of dispositional and informational variables in the production of civic participation. Communication Research 27 107-131. (2000). doi:10.1177/009365000027002001 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/009365000027002001
87. Schudson, M. Why conversation is not the soul of democracy. Critical Studies in Mass Communication 14 297-309. (1997). doi:10.1080/15295039709367020 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15295039709367020
88. Shah, D. V. McLeod, D. M. Friedland, L. A. Nelson, M. R. The politics of consumption/the consumption of politics. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 611 6-15. (2007). doi:10.1177/0002716207299647 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0002716207299647
89. Shah, D. V. McLeod, J. M. Yoon, S. Communication, context, and community: An exploration of print, broadcast, and Internet influences. Communication Research 28 464-506. (2001). doi:10.1177/009365001028004005 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/009365001028004005
90. Shah, D. V. Scheufele, D. A. Explicating opinion leadership: Nonpolitical dispositions, information consumption, and civic participation Political Communication 23 1-22. (2006). doi:10.1080/10584600500476932 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10584600500476932
91. Sheer, V. C. Cline, R. J. Testing a model of perceived information adequacy and uncertainty reduction in physician-patient interactions. Journal of Applied Communication Research 23 44-59. (1995). doi:10.1080/00909889509365413 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00909889509365413
92. Sheingold, C. A. Social networks and voting: The resurrection of a research agenda. American Sociological Review 38 712-720. (1973). doi:10.2307/2094133 http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2094133
93. Tedesco, J. C. (2004). Changing the channel: Use of the Internet for communicating about politics. In L. L. Kaid (Ed.), Handbook of political communication research (pp. 507-532). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
94. Tversky, A. Kahneman, D. The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. Science 211 453-458. (1981). doi:10.1126/science.7455683 http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.7455683
95. Wanta, W., & Ghanem, S. (2007). Effects of agenda setting. In R. W. Preiss, B. M. Gayle, N. Burrel, M. Allen, & J. Bryant (Eds.), Mass media effects research: Advances through meta-analysis (pp. 37-51). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
96. Weaver, D., McCombs, M., & Shaw, D. L. (2004). Agenda-setting research: Issues, attributes, and influences. In L. L. Kaid (Ed.), Handbook of political campaign research (pp. 257-282). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
97. Young, D. G. Late-night comedy and the salience of the candidates’ caricatured traits in the 2000 election. Mass Communication & Society 9 339-366. (2006). doi:10.1207/s15327825mcs0903_5 http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15327825mcs0903_5
98. Zaller, J. R. (1992). Nature and origins of mass opinion. New York: Cambridge University Press.
99. Zaller, J. (1996). The myth of massive media impact revived: New support for a discredited idea. In D. C. Mutz, P. M. Sniderman, & R. A. Brody (Eds.), Political persuasion and attitude change (pp. 17-78). Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.