Presidential primary debates compared: timing of debate and size of candidate field as moderators of debate effects

References

• Agger, R. E., M. N. Goldstein, and S. A. Pearl. 1961. “Political Cynicism: Measurement and Meaning.” The Journal of Politics 23: 477–506.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Benoit, W. L., G. J. Hansen, and R. M. Verser. 2003. “A Meta-Analysis of the Effects of Viewing U.S. Presidential Debates.” Communication Monographs 70(4): 335–350. http://doi.org/10.1080/0363775032000179133
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Benoit, W. L., M. S. McKinney, and M. T. Stephenson. 2002. “Effects of Watching Primary Debates in the 2000 U.S. Presidential Campaign.” Journal of Communication 54(2): 316–333. doi: 10.1111/j.1460-2466.2002.tb02547.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berelson, B. R., P. F. Lazarsfeld, and W. N. McPhee. 1954. Voting: A Study of Opinion Formation in a Presidential Campaign. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Best, S. J., and C. Hubbard. 1999. “Maximizing ‘Minimal Effects’: The Impact of Early Primary Season Debates on Voter Preferences.” American Politics Quarterly 27(4): 450–467. http://doi.org/10.1177/1532673×99027004004
   Google Scholar
• Chaffee, S. H. 1978. “Presidential Debates: Are they Helpful to Voters ?” Communication Monographs 45(4): 330–346. https://doi.org/10.1080/03637757809375978
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Craig, S. C., R. G. Niemi, and G. E. Silver. 1990. “Political Efficacy and Trust: A Report on the NES Pilot Study Items.” Political Behavior 12(3): 289–314. doi:10.1007/BF00992337.
   Google Scholar
• Drew, D., and D. Weaver. 2006. “Voter Learning in the 2004 Presidential Election: Did the Media Matter ?” Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly 83(1): 25–42.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Easton, D. 1975. “A Re-Assessment of the Concept of Political Support.” British Journal of Political Science 5(4): 435–457. doi: 10.1017/S0007123400008309.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Enten, H. 2015. “Is six Democratic debates too few ?” FiveThirtyEight, May 6. https://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/is-six-democratic-debates-too-few/
   Google Scholar
• Fu, H., Y. Mou, M. J. Miller, and G. Jalette. 2011. “Reconsidering Political Cynicism and Political Involvement: A Test of Antecedents.” American Communication Journal 13(2): 44–61.
   Google Scholar
• Hinck, S. S., R. S. Hinck, W. O. Dailey, and E. A. Hinck. 2013. “Thou Shalt not Speak Ill of any Fellow Republicans? Politeness Theory in the 2012 Republican Primary Debates.” Argumentation and Advocacy 49(4): 259–275.
   Google Scholar
• Kaid, L. L. 2008. “Political Information Efficacy.” In Encyclopedia of Political Communication, edited by L. L. Kaid and C. Holtz-Bacha, Vol. 2, 579–580. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Kaid, L. L., M. S. McKinney, and J. C. Tedesco. 2000. Civic Dialogue in the Presidential Campaign: Candidate, Media, and Public Voices. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kaid, L. L., S. M. McKinney, and J. C. Tedesco. 2007. “Introduction: Political Information Efficacy and Young Voters.” American Behavioral Scientist 50: 1093–1111.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Katz, E., and J. J. Feldman. 1962. “The Debates in the Light of Research: A Survey of Surveys.” In The Great Debates: Kennedy vs. Nixon, 1960, edited byS. Kraus, 173–223. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kennamer, J. D., and S. H. Chaffee. 1982. “Communication of Political Information During Early Presidential Primaries: Cognition, Affect, and Uncertainty.” In Communication Yearbook, edited by M. Burgoon, Vol. 5, 627–650. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Books.
   Google Scholar
• Kim, Y. M., and K. Garrett. 2012. “On-line and Memory-Based: Revisiting the Relationship Between Candidate Evaluation Processing Models.” Political Behavior 34: 345–368. doi: 10.1007/s11109-011-9158-9
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kirk, R., and D. Schill. 2011. “A Digital Agora: Citizen Participation in the 2008 Presidential Debates.” American Behavioral Scientist 55(3): 325–347. http://doi.org/10.1177/0002764210392167
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kondik, K., and G. Skelley. 2015. “Eight decades of debate.” Center for Politics, July 30. http://www.centerforpolitics.org/crystalball/articles/eight-decades-of-debate/
   Google Scholar
• Kunda, Z. 1990. “The Case for Motivated Reasoning.” Psychological Bulletin 108(3): 480–498. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.108.3.480
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lanoue, D. J., and P. R. Schrott. 1989. “The Effects of Primary Debateson Public Opinion .” Political Behavior 11 ( 3): 289–306. http://doi.org/10.1007/BF00992301
   Google Scholar
• Lemert, J. B., W. R. Elliott, K. J. Nestvold, and G. R. Rarick. 1983. “Effects of Viewing a Presidential Primary Debate.” Communication Research 10(2): 155–173. http://doi.org/10.1177/009365083010002001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lewis-Beck, M. S., W. G. Jacoby, H. Norpoth, and H. F. Weisberg. 2008. The American Voter Revisited. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lodge, M., and C. S. Taber. 2013. The Rationalizing Voter. New York: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• McKinney, M. S., and M. C. Banwart. 2005. “Rocking the Youth Vote Through Debate: Examining the Effects of a Citizen Versus Journalist Controlled Debate on Civic Engagement.” Journalism Studies 6: 153–163.
   Google Scholar
• McKinney, M. S., and D. B. Carlin. 2004. “Political Campaign Debates.” In Handbook of Political Communication Research, edited by L. L. Kaid, 203–234. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• McKinney, M. S., and S. Chattopadhyay. 2007. “Political Engagement Through Debates: Young Citizens’ Reactions to the 2004 Presidential Debates.” American Behavioral Scientist 50(9): 1169–1182. http://doi.org/10.1177/0002764207300050
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McKinney, M. S., C. B. Davis, and J. Delbert. 2009. “The First – and Last – Woman Standing: Hillary Rodham Clinton's Presidential Primary Debate Performance.” In Cracked but not Shattered: Hillary Rodham Clinton's Unsuccessful Campaign for the Presidency, edited by T. F. Sheck, 125–148. Lanham, MD: Lexington Books.
   Google Scholar
• McKinney, M. S., L. L. Kaid, and T. A. Robertson. 2001. “The Front-Runner, Contenders, and Also-Rans: Effects of Watching a 2000 Republican Primary Debate.” American Behavioral Scientist 44(12): 2232–2251. http://doi.org/10.1177/00027640121958294
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McKinney, M. S., and L. A. Rill. 2009. “Not Your Parents’ Presidential Debates: Examining the Effects of the CNN/YouTube Debates on Young Citizens’ Civic Engagement.” Communication Studies 60(4): 392–406. http://doi.org/10.1080/10510970903110001
   Google Scholar
• McKinney, M. S., and B. R. Warner. 2013. “Do presidential Debates Matter? Examining a Decade of Campaign Debate Effects.” Argumentation & Advocacy 49(4): 238–258.
   Google Scholar
• Miller, A. H. 1974. “Political Issues and Trust in Government: 1964–1970.” The American Political Science Review 68: 951–972.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Murphy, C. 2016. “Report: presidential primary debate audiences.” NDN, May 25. http://www.ndn.org/blog/2016/03/report-presidential-primary-debate-audiences
   Google Scholar
• Pfau, M. 1987. “The Influence of Intraparty Political Debates on Candidate Preference.” Communication Research, 14(6): 687–697. http://doi.org/10.1177/009365087014006004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pfau, M., J. B. Houston, and S. M. Semmler. 2005. “Presidential Election Campaigns and American Democracy: The Relationship Between Communication Use and Normative Outcomes.” American Behavioral Scientist 49(1): 48–62. http://doi.org/10.1177/0002764205279429
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pinkleton, B. E., and E. W. Austin. 2001. “Individual Motivations, Perceived Media Importance, and Political Disaffection.” Political Communication 18(3): 321–334. http://doi.org/10.1080/10584600152400365
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ray, R. F. 1961. “Thomas E. Dewey: The Great Oregon Debate of 1948.” In American Public Address: Studies in Honor of Albert Craig Baird, edited by R. Reid, 245–270. Columbia: University of Missouri Press.
   Google Scholar
• Rowland, R. C. 2013. “The First 2012 Presidential Campaign Debate: The Decline of Reason in Presidential Debates.” Communication Studies 64(5): 528–547. http://doi.org/10.1080/10510974.2013.833530
   Google Scholar
• Sears, D. O., and S. H. Chaffee. 1979. “The Uses and Effects of the 1976 Debates: An Overview of Empirical Studies.” In The Great Debates: Carter vs. Ford 1976, edited by S. Kraus, 223–261. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Steel, E. 2015. “CNN says G.O.P. event was third-highest in ratings for a primary event.” The New York Times, December 11. https://www.nytimes.com/politics/first-draft/2015/12/16/cnn-says-g-o-p-event-was-third-highest-in-ratings-for-a-primary-debate/?_r=0
   Google Scholar
• Valentino, N. A., M. N. Beckmann, and T. A. Buhr. 2001. “A Spiral of Cynicism for Some: The Contingent Effects of Campaign News Frames on Participation and Confidence In Government.” Political Communication 18(4): 347–367. http://doi.org/10.1080/10584600152647083
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Verba, S., K. L. Schlozman, and H. E. Brady. 1995. Voices and Equality: Civic Voluntarism in American Politics. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Wald, K. D., and M. B. Lupfer. 1978. “The Presidential Debate as a Civics Lesson.” Public Opinion Quarterly 42: 342–353.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wall, V., J. L. Golden, and H. James. 1988. “Perceptions of the 1984 Presidential Debates and a Select 1988 Presidential Primary Debate.” Presidential Studies Quarterly 18(3): 541–563. http://www.jstor.org/stable/40574498
   Google Scholar
• Warner, B. R., S. T. McGowen, and J. Hawthorne. 2012. “Limbaugh's Social Media Nightmare: Facebook and Twitter as Spaces for Political Action.” Journal of Radio & Audio Media 19(2): 257–275. http://doi.org/10.1080/19376529.2012.722479
   Google Scholar
• Yawn, M., K. Ellsworth, B. Beatty, and K. F. Kahn. 1998. “How a Presidential Primary Debate Changed Attitudes of Audience Members.” Political Behavior 20(2): 155–181.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar