Leading up to the 2004 presidential debates, there was considerable discussion about the mode of presentation on television, that is, debate coverage with simultaneous reaction shots of the opponent while a candidate was speaking or coverage with isolated shorts of each candidate only. In fact, many commentators argued that split-screen coverage of Bush's reactions to Kerry's statements hurt the president during the first debate. This study analyzes the impact of split-versus single-screen debate coverage in the 2004 campaign using a large-scale experimental design with about 700 participants, conducted at a large midwestern university. Consistent with explanatory models from political science and social psychology, findings show that split-screen coverage led Bush supporters to become more extreme in their positive and negative judgments about Bush and Kerry, respectively. Kerry supporters however, had strong views about Bush from the beginning and changed little based on the mode of coverage.

https://terpconnect.umd.edu/~nan/738readings/Scheufele%20et%20al%202007%20split-screen.pdf

My Friend's Enemy: How Split-Screen Debate Coverage Influences Evaluation of Presidential Debates:

The current study examines how a politician's “active” or “passive” nonverbal behavior can influence recipients' perception of his/her image in TV talk shows. In addition, the effects of different host and studio audience reaction shots towards the politician were analyzed. To do so, an experiment with a 2 × 3 × 3 factorial design was conducted (n = 356). The stimulus material was produced in a TV studio. The results indicate a clear influence of a politician's nonverbal behavior style and the TV host's nonverbal reactions on the recipients' image-perception.

The Rivalry of Nonverbal Cues on the Perception of Politicians by Television Viewers

Compared to televised debates using a single-screen format, such debates using a split screen presenting both debaters simultaneously show viewers the nonverbal reactions of each debater's opponent. The authors examined how appropriate or inappropriate such nonverbal behaviors are perceived to be. Students watched one of four versions of a televised debate. One version used a single-screen format, showing only the speaker, whereas the other three versions used a split-screen format in which the speaker's opponent displayed constant, occasional, or no nonverbal disagreement with the speaker. Students then rated the debaters' appropriateness. Analysis indicated that the opponent was perceived to be less appropriate when he displayed any background disagreement compared to when he did not. The students perceived the speaker as most appropriate when his opponent displayed constant nonverbal disagreement.

Audience Perceptions of Candidates’ Appropriateness as a Function of Nonverbal Behaviors Displayed During Televised Political Debates

This study examined whether a debater's background nonverbal behavior affected audience perceptions of her and her opponent's likeability. Students watched one of four versions of a televised debate. In each, while the speaking debater appeared on the main screen, subscreens displayed her opponent's background nonverbal behavior. In one version, the nonspeaking debater displayed a neutral expression, whereas in the others she displayed occasional disagreement, nearly constant disagreement, or both agreement and disagreement. After viewing the debates, students rated the debaters' likeability. Analysis indicated that background behavior influenced perceptions of the nonverbal communicator but not of the speaking debater.

/pdf/impression-management-in-televised-debates-the-effect-of-hjt1e05vpg.pdf

Impression Management in Televised Debates: The Effect of Background Nonverbal Behavior on Audience Perceptions of Debaters' Likeability

This study examined the effects of background nonverbal behavior displayed with the purpose of undermining one's opponent in televised debates. Students watched one of four versions of a televised debate. In each, while the speaking debater appeared on the main screen, subscreens displayed her nonspeaking opponent's background nonverbal behavior. In one version, the non-speaking debater remained "stone faced" during her opponent's speech, while in the other three she nonverbally displayed occasional disagreement, nearly constant disagreement, or both agreement and disagreement. After viewing the debates, students rated the debaters' credibility, appropriateness, objectivity, and debate skills, in addition to judging who won the debate. Analysis indicated that background nonverbal behavior influenced audience perceptions of debaters' credibility, appropriateness, objectivity, debate skill, and the extent to which the debate was won. These results suggest that adding nonverbal agreement to expressions of nonverbal disagreement do not reduce the negative impacts of communicating disagreement nonverbally during an opponent's speech and may in fact further decrease the audiences' perception of a debater's credibility and overall performance.

The role of background behavior in televised debates: does displaying nonverbal agreement and/or disagreement benefit either debater?

Compared to televised debates using a single-screen format, those using a split screen, i.e., those showing both debaters simultaneously, provide viewers greater access to the nonverbal reactions of a debater's opponent. This study examined the effect of such nonverbal reactions on viewers' perceptions of a speaker's credibility. Students watched one of four versions of a televised debate. One version used a single-screen format, showing only the speaker, while the other three versions used a split-screen format in which the speaker's opponent displayed constant, occasional, or no nonverbal disagreement with the speaker. After watching the videos, students rated the speaker's credibility. Analysis indicated that the speaker was given significantly higher character and competence ratings when his opponent was in constant disagreement than when his opponent was not shown or when his opponent indicated moderate and no disagreement. Moreover, the speaker was given significantly higher ratings for composure and sociability when his opponent was in constant disagreement than when his opponent was not shown or when his opponent indicated no disagreement. These results and their implications are discussed.

Split-Screen Versus Single-Screen Formats in Televised Debates: Does Access to an Opponent's Nonverbals Affect Viewers' Perceptions of a Speaker's Credibility?

Popular Tasks used by Researchers

How can I help with your research?

Get more enhanced response by uploading the PDFs you want me to reference.

No relevant PDFs in your library

SciSpace is the AI research assistant for academics. Run systematic literature reviews on 280M+ papers, and write papers with cited sources. Trusted by 1M+ students, PhDs & researchers.

SciSpace | AI for Research

We encountered an error while loading the panel. Please try refreshing the page.

Something went wrong

Analyze PDFs

Code & Manuscripts

Funding & Grants

Literature & Patents

Medical & Clinical Data

Systematic Review

Visualize & Present

Web & Data

Build a Google Scholar-like website for your research.

Build a website

Create charts and images for your research

Create a Chart

Write a paper for submission to a journal

Draft a manuscript

Patent Search

Design eye-catching scientific posters in minutes.

Scientific Poster Generation

Systematic Literature Review

Anyone with the link can view this chat. You can switch it back to private anytime.

One task is running at the moment. Your messages will be shown right after.

Drag and drop or click here to browse

Loved by <highlight>1 million+</highlight> researchers

Extract a list of specific topics and their sources from unstructured text

Topics

Compare and analyze relevant papers that matches with your search

Papers

Get insights from PDFs and bookmarked papers from your library

My library

Recent searches

Try searching for:

Catch AI-generated content in scholarly and non-scholarly content

{ai} Detector

Ai Writer

Get PDF Summaries, highlighted text explanations 

Chat with PDF

Effortlessly create in-text citations and bibliographies in APA and 2,500 other formats

Citation generator

Get explanations, summaries, and answers on academic papers

Ease up your research workflow with {scispace}'s cohort of exciting AI tools

Elevate your academic writing skills and convey your ideas the way you want

Paraphraser

Explore our range of reading and writing tools

Your file is being prepared and should be ready in a few minutes. If it's a large file, it might take a bit longer. You can close this window, and we'll email you the file when it's done.

You have reached a maximum limit of <strong>{limit}</strong> columns in the table. Remove at least <strong>1</strong> column to add or create another one.

John S. Seiter

Author Tools

Chat about Author

Papers

Split-Screen Versus Single-Screen Formats in Televised Debates: Does Access to an Opponent's Nonverbals Affect Viewers' Perceptions of a Speaker's Credibility?