One mechanism by which citizens learn about candidates and issues is through watching presidential debates. Some scholars have raised concerns that these events, however, disproportionately benefit those already high in political knowledge more so than others with lesser knowledge levels. We hypothesize that knowledge begets knowledge because it prompts a constructive cognitive process that results from elaboration and reflection. We test this hypothesis in an experiment that also considers whether issue priming could help mitigate the deficit that those lower in political sophistication have when viewing campaign events. Participants ( N = 543) watched a 9-minute segment focusing on economic issues drawn from the first 2020 presidential debate between President Donald Trump and former Vice President Joseph Biden. Half of the participants were randomly assigned to an issue priming condition and viewed the debate segment after reading a narrative text on economic policy, and the other half read an unrelated text. The study presents a model that reveals the following: (a) cognitive elaboration mediates the relationship between prior political knowledge and learning from a campaign event, (b) providing citizens with background issue–related knowledge produces a similar elaborative effect as did preexisting political knowledge, and (c) participants demonstrate greater political opinion articulation following this enhanced elaboration leading to more learning. The implications for cultivating a knowledgeable democratic electorate are discussed.

The present research investigates outcome-based dissonance in the 2016 U.S. Presidential election, a context where a significant number of citizens had unfavorable opinions of both candidates. When one is faced with a choice between two unfavorable alternatives, the outcome will be the same (i.e., unfavorable) regardless of the choice. This dilemma of having multiple alternatives leading to the same unfavorable outcome is known as Morton's Fork. Our results, using a national online sample (n = 247) suggest that when given the opportunity to choose between a favorable and unfavorable alternative, outcome-based dissonance occurs when the preferred (chosen) alternative is inconsistent with the outcome and dissonance reduction proceeds by reducing the "evaluative spread" (i.e., decreasing evaluations of the chosen/losing alternative and/or increasing evaluations of the rejected/winning alternative). In contrast, outcome-based dissonance is diminished (or nonoccurring) when one chooses between unfavorable choice alternatives. These results suggest that valence of choice alternatives is a relevant factor in the production of outcome-based dissonance. Implications are discussed.

Raucous audience applause–cheering, laughter, and even booing by a passionately involved electorate marked the 2016 presidential debates from the start of the primary season. While the presence and intensity of these observable audience responses (OARs) can be expected from partisan primary debates, the amount of not just laughter, but also applause–cheering and booing during the first general election debate between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump was unprecedented. Such norm-violating audience behavior raises questions concerning not just the presence, strength, and timing of these OAR, but also their influence on those watching on television, streaming video, or listening to radio. This report presents findings from three interconnected studies. Study 1 provides a baseline for analysis by systematically coding the studio audience response in terms of utterance type (laughter, applause–cheering, booing, and mixtures), when and how intensely it occurred, and in response to which candidate. Study 2 uses observational analysis of 362 undergraduate students at a large state university in the southern United States who watched the debate on seven different news networks in separate rooms and evaluated the candidates’ performance. Study 2 considered co-occurrence of OAR in the studio audience and in the field study rooms, finding laughter predominated and was more likely to co-occur than other OAR types. When standardized cumulative strength of room OAR was compared, findings suggest co-occurring OAR was stronger than that occurring solely in the field study rooms. Analysis of truncated data allowing for consideration of studio audience OAR intensity found that OAR intensity was not related to OAR type occurring in the field study rooms, but had a small effect on standardized cumulative strength. Study 3 considers the results of a continuous response measure (CRM) dial study in which 34 West Texas community members watched and rated the candidates during the first debate. Findings suggest that applause–cheering significantly influenced liking of the speaking candidate, whereas laughter did not. Further, response to applause–cheering was mediated by party identity, although not for laughter. Conclusions from these studies suggest laughter as being more stereotypic and likely to be mimicked whereas applause–cheering may be more socially contagious.

A field experiment was conducted to analyze the third and final 2016 presidential debate. Randomly assigned participants watched the debate in the format of mainly solo camera shots that alternate between the candidates (i.e., switched feed), or with both candidates framed side-by-side on screen (i.e., split screen feed). Though viewer feelings of positivity toward the candidates did not differ, visual presentation style had a significant effect on trait judgments for Donald Trump overall. Participants watching Trump on the switched camera feed perceived him as significantly more Sophisticated, Honest, Attractive, Sincere, Strong, Active, Intelligent, Trustworthy, and Generous. There was not an effect for Hillary Clinton’s trait ratings overall, though she was perceived as significantly more Strong, Competent, and Intelligent by those watching the switched feed. This suggests that visual presentation style significantly influenced viewer perceptions. Political ideology was a significant predictor of all but one of the traits for each candidate.

This study explores whether visual presentation style (i.e., camera shot variation) may influence perceptions of Presidential candidates during televised debates. In a field experiment, 341 randomly assigned college students viewed or listened to one of seven broadcast network or cable/satellite channel conditions during the first televised Presidential debate between Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton and Republican nominee Donald Trump. A feeling thermometer and 19 leadership and personal traits were assessed during the time leading up to the debate and again immediately afterward. No differences were found based on presentation style, likely reflecting lack of variance in visual differences between the networks and broadcast channels. However, participant political ideology was significantly related to postdebate feelings toward each candidate. Judgments of Clinton's professional and personal traits increased as was also the case albeit less significantly for Trump. Reasons for these changes in perceptions of the candidates following the debate are explored.

A national survey with 876 responses examined whether political consumerism is related to religious factors including beliefs about gay marriage, if the Bible is the literal word of God, religiosity or social capital, altruism or civic engagement, cognitive engagement, and the use of political social and digital media. Results suggest religious factors may be important in political consumption, with political consumers less likely to believe the Bible is the literal word of God, suggesting they perceive self-direction regarding their religious beliefs. Political consumers may exhibit universalism by participating in altruistic activities such as volunteering to help the poor, homeless and elderly. However, given their lack of support for gay marriage, traditional religious teachings may supersede universalism for certain social justice issues.

The authors examine whether predictors of adult political consumerism (i.e., boycotting and buycotting) and factors associated with youth civic and political participation also predict youth political consumerism. Data from a national mail survey of adolescents ages 12 to 17 years and their parents (n = 876) conducted in October 2012 are used to examine predictors of youth political consumerism. Factors analyzed include youth political and civic participation, parental modeling of boycotting and buycotting, and parental encouragement of following news and politics. Other factors examined include youth civic education, extracurricular participation, and youth social or civic attitudes. In addition, the authors assess differences between youth who boycott and those who buycott. The findings show that parental modeling is the most important predictor of youth political consumerism, and young political consumers also engage in civic and political activities. Moreover, youth boycotters and buycotters appear to exhibit differences in political ideology and motivations for political consumerism.

Studies of political consumerism among young citizens are a relatively recent development. In this study, the authors use Bronfenbrenner's ecological theory of child development as a first attempt to build an explanatory model of teens' socialization into political consumption behaviors. Structural equation modeling indicates that certain cultural factors (e.g., church attendance, parent education) influence micro-level systems within which children might acquire political consumer behaviors (including parent-child interaction, school activities related to politics, and online media use). Implications are discussed.

A national mail survey of adolescents between the ages of 12 and 17 (n = 876) was conducted immediately before the U.S. presidential election (October 2012) to investigate socialization agents that may correlate with political and civic engagement. The relative importance of potential correlates of engagement including demographics, parents, peers, schools, religion, traditional media, social networks, and digital communication were evaluated. Regression analysis revealed that civically engaged youth identify with a religion, participate in civic education activities at school and extracurricular activities, take action (e.g., boycotting or buycotting), develop attitudes about citizenship, and engage in online/social media political activities. Politically engaged youth come from higher income households, discuss news and politics, take action, and are very prone to engage in online/social media political activities. While a wider range of activities appear to be related to civic engagement, those who are politically engaged appear to have a strong interest in online media usage. Implications are discussed.

This is the second in a series of issues of American Behavioral Scientist (ABS) devoted to reevaluating the relationship between young citizens, the media, and political participation. The previous ABS issue (Volume 58, Issue 6) contained six survey research studies. This issue presents six additional studies employing other methodologies including a structural equation model focusing on youth political consumerism, four experimental studies ranging from the impact of debates to news format type and the impact of gender socialization, along with a case study suggesting how colleges and universities may encourage youth political and civic engagement. These two issues are intended to respond to advances in research presented in an issue devoted to the topic of youth political participation published in ABS in May of 2007. The first study, titled “Modeling Political Consumerism Among Young Consumers in the US: An Ecological Systems Approach,” employs Bronfenbrenner’s ecological theory of child development as an attempt to build an explanatory model of teens’ socialization into political consumption behaviors. Structural equation modeling indicates that certain cultural factors (e.g., church attendance, parent education) influence micro-level systems within which children might acquire political consumer behaviors (including parent-child interaction, school activities related to politics, and online media use). The second study, titled “Civic Engagement through Presidential Debates: Young Citizens’ Political Attitudes in the 2012 Election,” explores the effects of televised presidential debate viewing on young citizens’ candidate evaluations and normative democratic attitudes, including political cynicism and political information efficacy. Findings reveal that debate viewing decreases young citizens’ political cynicism and strengthens political information efficacy. Longitudinal analysis tracked young citizens’ democratic attitudes from predebate to postelection, finding that one’s political information efficacy intensifies throughout the course of the ongoing campaign but