Determinants of Defense in Presidential Debates

Abstract

This study investigates the relationship between attacks and defenses in political debates. Being the target of an attack provides a candidate with opportunity and motivation to defend; hence, the frequency of attacks directed toward a candidate should be directly related to the number of defenses produced by that candidate. This study employs four data sets to test this expectation: 23 U.S. general presidential debates, 59 U.S. presidential primary debates, 12 U.S. Senate debates, and 10 non-U.S. debates (France, Israel, Taiwan, and Ukraine). Statistical analysis confirms that there is a significant positive relationship between number of attacks aimed at a candidate and the number of defenses employed by that candidate in all four samples of political campaign debates. Arguably, this form of direct clash between candidates could be particularly beneficial to voters as it provides a deeper understanding of the pros and cons of governmental policy and related issues.

Keywords:

• Attacks
• Defenses
• Non-U.S. Debates
• Presidential Primary and General Debates
• U.S. Senate Debates

Notes

Note. U.S. presidential and primary debates have ranges for kappa because intercoder reliability was calculated separately for debates from different years.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

William L. Benoit

William L. Benoit (Ph.D. Wayne State University, 1979) is a professor in the Department of Communication at the University of Missouri; Columbia, MO 65211.