A face for radio? How viewers and listeners reacted differently to the third leaders' debate in 2010

M. Shephard, R. Johns

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

7 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Neil Kinnock expressed scepticism about Gordon Brown's likely showing in the 2010 election debates, suggesting that the Labour leader had a ‘radio face’. We report an experiment in which students were split randomly between audio and video conditions for the third debate. As Kinnock predicted, Gordon Brown was more often proclaimed the winner by listeners. Nick Clegg, not David Cameron, benefited most from television. These differences were statistically significant despite a small sample (n = 63). We test three explanations for Clegg's advantage: (i) that television boosts the salience of certain traits (notably attractiveness); (ii) that television boosts the importance of ‘style’ over ‘substance’; (iii) that listeners form judgements based on performance throughout the debate, while viewers are disproportionately influenced by memorable incidents or remarks. There is evidence supporting all three explanations.
LanguageEnglish
Pages1-18
Number of pages18
JournalBritish Journal of Politics and International Relations
Volume14
Issue number1
Early online date5 Jul 2011
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Feb 2012

Fingerprint

television
listener
radio
leader
social attraction
election
incident
student
video
labor
experiment
performance
evidence

Keywords

  • elections
  • voting behavior
  • election campaigns
  • general election

Cite this

@article{80a99968fada42bca02d47b032dadf09,
title = "A face for radio? How viewers and listeners reacted differently to the third leaders' debate in 2010",
abstract = "Neil Kinnock expressed scepticism about Gordon Brown's likely showing in the 2010 election debates, suggesting that the Labour leader had a ‘radio face’. We report an experiment in which students were split randomly between audio and video conditions for the third debate. As Kinnock predicted, Gordon Brown was more often proclaimed the winner by listeners. Nick Clegg, not David Cameron, benefited most from television. These differences were statistically significant despite a small sample (n = 63). We test three explanations for Clegg's advantage: (i) that television boosts the salience of certain traits (notably attractiveness); (ii) that television boosts the importance of ‘style’ over ‘substance’; (iii) that listeners form judgements based on performance throughout the debate, while viewers are disproportionately influenced by memorable incidents or remarks. There is evidence supporting all three explanations.",
keywords = "elections, voting behavior, election campaigns, general election",
author = "M. Shephard and R. Johns",
year = "2012",
month = "2",
doi = "10.1111/j.1467-856X.2011.00465.x",
language = "English",
volume = "14",
pages = "1--18",
journal = "British Journal of Politics and International Relations",
issn = "1369-1481",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - A face for radio? How viewers and listeners reacted differently to the third leaders' debate in 2010

AU - Shephard, M.

AU - Johns, R.

PY - 2012/2

Y1 - 2012/2

N2 - Neil Kinnock expressed scepticism about Gordon Brown's likely showing in the 2010 election debates, suggesting that the Labour leader had a ‘radio face’. We report an experiment in which students were split randomly between audio and video conditions for the third debate. As Kinnock predicted, Gordon Brown was more often proclaimed the winner by listeners. Nick Clegg, not David Cameron, benefited most from television. These differences were statistically significant despite a small sample (n = 63). We test three explanations for Clegg's advantage: (i) that television boosts the salience of certain traits (notably attractiveness); (ii) that television boosts the importance of ‘style’ over ‘substance’; (iii) that listeners form judgements based on performance throughout the debate, while viewers are disproportionately influenced by memorable incidents or remarks. There is evidence supporting all three explanations.

AB - Neil Kinnock expressed scepticism about Gordon Brown's likely showing in the 2010 election debates, suggesting that the Labour leader had a ‘radio face’. We report an experiment in which students were split randomly between audio and video conditions for the third debate. As Kinnock predicted, Gordon Brown was more often proclaimed the winner by listeners. Nick Clegg, not David Cameron, benefited most from television. These differences were statistically significant despite a small sample (n = 63). We test three explanations for Clegg's advantage: (i) that television boosts the salience of certain traits (notably attractiveness); (ii) that television boosts the importance of ‘style’ over ‘substance’; (iii) that listeners form judgements based on performance throughout the debate, while viewers are disproportionately influenced by memorable incidents or remarks. There is evidence supporting all three explanations.

KW - elections

KW - voting behavior

KW - election campaigns

KW - general election

U2 - 10.1111/j.1467-856X.2011.00465.x

DO - 10.1111/j.1467-856X.2011.00465.x

M3 - Article

VL - 14

SP - 1

EP - 18

JO - British Journal of Politics and International Relations

T2 - British Journal of Politics and International Relations

JF - British Journal of Politics and International Relations

SN - 1369-1481

IS - 1

ER -