ABSTRACT
The vast majority of published communication scholarship regarding political campaign debates focuses on the actions of the presidential candidates. Considerably less research, by comparison, has contributed to our understanding of the role of vice-presidential candidates. Experimental research has revealed that exposure to presidential debates can influence viewers’ political information efficacy, cynicism, polarization, and feeling thermometer evaluations of the candidates, but very little research examines the why behind these shifts. Based on a focus group of undecided voters who watched the 2016 vice-presidential debate, this study presents exploratory analysis of how a vice-presidential debate influences the political attitudes and behaviors of uncommitted voters. We first review prior research on the vice-presidential candidate's rhetorical role in the campaign as well as research on the impact of vice-presidential debates, followed by a description of our study's methodology, and conclude with an extended analysis of the 2016 vice-presidential debate arguments and how undecided voters responded.
Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank Mitchell S. McKinney and the reviewers for their feedback and consideration.
Disclosure statement
Data collection was partially supported by CNN.
Additional information
Notes on contributors
Jacob W. Wrasse
Jacob W. Wrasse is a graduate teaching assistant pursuing an MA in Communication and Advocacy at James Madison University.
Dan Schill
Dan Schill is an Associate Professor in the School of Communication Studies and Affiliate Professor in Political Science at James Madison University.
Rita Kirk
Rita Kirk is the William F. May Endowed Director of the Cary M. Maguire Center for Ethics & Public Responsibility and a Professor of Corporate Communication & Public Affairs at Southern Methodist University.