Few political events capture the national imagination like debates. They are not just a medium for public arguments but also a key source of political information and opinion. They provide voters with the opportunity to compare and contrast candidates’ positions, visions, and records with their own. They are also a rare chance for candidates to publicly poke jabs at their opponents and try to deflate them.
As a result, political debates often produce moments of national importance – mainly gaffes. Examples include the infamous quip by former President Gerald Ford during his 1976 debate with Democratic candidate Jimmy Carter: “There is no Soviet domination of Europe, and there never will be under a Carter administration.”
But it’s not just political blunders that are remembered. Many of the most enduring debate moments are based on changing the moral framing and making people think differently about the issue in question. As a result, it is important to understand how debates can shape attitudes and policies.
To do this, we have studied the design of political debates, their format and structure to ensure equal time for each candidate, and their role in the shaping of political opinions and decision-making. We have also examined how the nature of a debate is affected by the participants. This work has led to new insights about how debates can be designed and how they influence attitudes, for example enabling conservatives to endorse gay marriage by framing it as a matter of loyalty to America (instead of a threat to their values) and getting voters to support expanded military spending by arguing that doing so would give jobs to unemployed workers (instead of a cost). This research is described in the paper “Debating politics: When a debate changes hearts and minds” and was published recently in the journal Nature.
About the Author
