Psikhologicheskie Issledovaniya • ISSN 2075-7999
peer-reviewed • open access journal
      

 

Pankratova A.A. Models of making a decision about a television debates winner

Full text in Russian: Панкратова А.А. Модели принятия решения о победителе в телевизионных дебатах
Lomonosov Moscow State University, Moscow, Russia

About author
Suggested citation


Two factors determine making a decision about televised debates winner: a viewer’s position on the issue debated and a viewer’s attitude to debates participants. The empirical study (N = 120) shows that the decision about a winner is made easier if there is cognitive coherence between a viewer’s position on the issue debated and a viewer’s attitude the speakers (a viewer both shares position of one the speakers and has a great liking for him/her). Cognitive coherence is reached in one of the following ways: the position on the issue debated changes the attitude to the speakers or the attitude to the speakers changes the position on the issue debated. If the decision is made in a situation of conflict (a viewer shares position of one the speakers but has a great liking for another one), a barrier of dissent from opinion is overcome easier than a barrier of antipathy for a speaker. The speaker whom a viewer likes best is higher evaluated for positivity criterion (a good man, a man of good morals). The debates winner unlike the debates looser has higher scores for brightness (he or she speaks emotionally, shows a good sense of humor).

Keywords: discussion, debate, winner, decision making, field theory, K.Lewin, theories of cognitive consistency

 

References

Aalberg T., Jenssen A. Do television debates in multiparty systems affect viewers? A quasi-experimental study with first-time voters. Scandinavian Political Studies, 2007, 30(1), 115–135.

Andreeva G.M. Psikhologiya sotsial'nogo poznaniya. Moscow: Aspekt Press, 2000. (in Russian)

Andreeva G.M. Sotsial'naya psikhologiya. Moscow: Aspekt Press, 2008. (in Russian)

Andreeva G.M., Bogomolova N.N., Petrovskaya L.A. Zarubezhnaya sotsial'naya psikhologiya XX stoletiya: teoreticheskie podkhody. Moscow: Aspekt Press, 2001. (in Russian)

Blickle G., Hauck S., Senft W. Assertion and consensus motives in argumentations. International Journal of Value-based Management, 1997, 10(2), 193–203.

Doerfel M., Connaughton S. Semantic networks and competition: election year winners and losers in U.S. televised presidential debates, 1960–2004. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 2009, 60(1), 201–218.

Halpern D. Psikhologiya kriticheskogo myshleniya. St. Petersburg: Piter, 2000. (in Russian)

Ivlev Yu.V. Logika. Moscow: TK Velbi, 2002. (in Russian)

Kirillov V.I., Starchenko A.A. Logika. Moscow: Yurist", 2001. (in Russian)

Lewin K. Teoriya polya v sotsial'nykh naukakh. St. Petersburg: Rech', 2000. (in Russian)

Luginbuhl M. Conversational violence in political TV debates: Forms and functions. Journal of Pragmatics, 2007, 39(8), 1371–1387.

Myers D. Sotsial'naya psikhologiya. St. Petersburg: Piter, 2004. (in Russian)

Nuolijarvi P., Tiittula L. Irony in political television debates. Journal of Pragmatics, 2011, 43(2), 572–587.

Pankratova A.A. Characteristics of conducting an argument versus motivation of the participants. Psikhologicheskie issledovaniya, 2011, No. 6(20), 11. http://psystudy.ru (in Russian, abstr. in English)

Pogozhina I.N., Pankratova A.A. Vestnik Moskovskogo universiteta. Ser. 14, Psikhologiya, 2005a, No. 1, 29–39. (in Russian)

Pogozhina I.N., Pankratova A.A. Vestnik Moskovskogo universiteta. Ser. 14, Psikhologiya, 2005b, No. 4, 43–48. (in Russian)

Povarnin S.I. Spor. O teorii i praktike spora. St. Petersburg: Lan', 1996. (in Russian)

Rips L.J., Brem S.K., Bailenson J.N. Reasoning dialogues. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 1999, 8(6), 172–177.

Schrott P. Electoral consequences of “winning” televised campaign debates. Public Opinion Quarterly, 1990, 54(4), 567–585. doi:10.1086/269228

Senior P. Electoral impact of televised leaders’ debates on Australian federal elections. Australian Journal of Political Science, 2008, 43(3), 443–464.

Sidorenko E.V. Metody matematicheskoi obrabotki v psikhologii. St. Petersburg: Rech', 2002. (in Russian)

MoscoviciS. (Ed.). Sotsial'naya psikhologiya. St. Petersburg: Piter, 2007. (in Russian)

Tsfati Y. Debating the debate: The impact of exposure to debate news coverage and its interaction with exposure to the actual debate. Press/Politics, 2003, 8(3), 70–86.

Voishvillo E.K., Degtyarev M.G. Logika. Moscow: Vlados-Press, 2001. (in Russian)

Zmanovskaya E.V. Rukovodstvo po upravleniyu lichnym imidzhem. St. Petersburg: Rech', 2005. (in Russian)

Received 10 June 2012. Date of publication: 23 December 2012.

About author

Pankratova Alina A. Ph.D., Junior Research Associate, Faculty of Psychology, Lomonosov Moscow State University, ul. Mokhovaya, 11, str. 9, 125009 Moscow, Russia.
E-mail: Этот адрес электронной почты защищен от спам-ботов. У вас должен быть включен JavaScript для просмотра.

Suggested citation

Pankratova A.A. Models of making a decision about a television debates winner. Psikhologicheskie Issledovaniya, 2012, Vol. 5, No. 26, p. 6. http://psystudy.ru (in Russian, abstr. in English).

Permanent URL: http://psystudy.ru/index.php/eng/2012v5n26e/755-pankratova26e.html

Back to top >>