Doctoral Dissertation Research in Political Science: Campaigning for the Agenda: Agenda-Setting in the 2000, 2004, and 2008 Presidential Campaigns

政治学博士论文研究：议程竞选：2000 年、2004 年和 2008 年总统竞选中的议程设置

• 批准号: 1024166
• 负责人: Suzanna Linn
• 金额: $ 1.09万
• 依托单位: Pennsylvania State Univ University Park
• 依托单位国家: 美国
• 项目类别: Standard Grant
• 财政年份: 2010
• 资助国家: 美国
• 起止时间: 2010-07-01 至 2012-06-30
• 项目状态: 已结题
• 来源: https://www.nsf.gov/awardsearch/showAward?AWD_ID=1024166&HistoricalAwards=false
• 关键词: Doctoral; Dissertation; Research; Political; Science

Scholars have long suggested that presidential elections can result in dramatic changes in the political landscape (Carmines & Stimson 1989) and produce significantly higher levels of political participation (McDonald & Popkin 2001). As a result much attention has been paid to the strategies employed by candidates (Lau & Pomper 2004; Brader 2006) and the effects of those tactics on the public (Ansolabehere et al. 1994, 1995, 1999). Yet, comparatively little attention has been directed toward explaining the issue content of the campaign. We are offered volumes of anecdotal evidence suggesting that the candidates are in complete control of which issues are addressed with slogans like "it's the economy, stupid!" (The War Room 1993) or "Change we can believe in" (Jamieson 2009). But these accounts do not explain what happens beyond their immediate contexts and offer little toward a broader theory of campaign agenda-setting. one is still left with several questions: What do the patterns of issue attention of modern presidential campaigns look like? Is issue attention by candidates marked with incremental changes, implying that they are in complete control of what issues are addressed? Or, does candidate attention exhibit patterns of stability followed by radical changes, indicating that the candidates' attention is sensitive to outside influence? And perhaps most importantly, who, if anyone, is able to affect the candidates' attention to issues? Their opponents? The mass media? Or the voting public who they are courting?In this project, the investigator addresses the questions stated above using a dynamic framework to track the candidates' attention to issues over time through the 2000, 2004, and 2008 presidential campaigns. Drawing upon previous work by agenda-setting scholars, the investigator suggests that the candidates? attention to issues will follow Baumgartner and Jones' (1993, 2005) theory of punctuated equilibria (that attention will be marked with radical changes) and that issue attention is susceptible to outside influence. These claims are evaluated using descriptive distributional analysis of the patterns of change in the candidates issue attention over the course of three campaigns. The investigator then examines which issues receive attention by the candidates, the mainstream media, and the public to evaluate the degree to which attention by one actor can affect attention by the others. This research is important for several reasons. First, it will provide theoretical and empirical contributions to our understanding of the dynamics of presidential campaigns, agenda-setting, and inter-actor relations in the government. Second, evidence indicating that candidates' respective agendas follow patterns of stability and punctuation similar to those found in other studies of agenda-setting will further our understanding of how issues reach the forefront of the campaign. Third and finally, this examination of the outside influences on the candidates' respective agendas will help explain whether the candidates are in complete control of the issue content of the campaign or if they are responsive to the demands of the mass media and the public.This study also has several broader impacts that are embodied in the new datasets the investigator will make publicly available for future scholarly research. These data will offer insight into the dynamics of presidential campaigns and agendas, but also provide the foundation for empirical examinations of the linkages between campaigns and public policy. Further, these data will assist in furthering scholarship on government responsiveness and connections between public policy and public opinion. Lastly, this project also offers the potential for several undergraduate political scientists to receive training and experiences in advanced research practices, data collection, automated coding, and empirical analysis.

学者们一直认为，总统选举可以导致政治格局的巨大变化（Carmines Stimson 1989），并产生显着更高水平的政治参与（McDonald Popkin 2001）。 因此，人们对候选人所采用的策略（Lau Pomper 2004; Brader 2006）以及这些策略对公众的影响（Ansolabehere et al. 1994，1995，1999）给予了很大的关注。 然而，相对而言，很少有人注意解释运动的问题内容。 我们得到了大量的轶事证据，表明候选人完全控制了哪些问题是用“这是经济，愚蠢！”（战争室1993）或“我们可以相信的变化”（贾米森2009）。 但这些描述并没有解释在其直接背景之外发生的事情，也没有为更广泛的竞选活动背景设置理论提供什么。人们仍然有几个问题：现代总统竞选的问题关注模式是什么样的？ 候选人对问题的关注是否以渐进的变化为标志，这意味着他们完全控制了要解决的问题？ 或者，候选人的注意力是否表现出稳定后又发生根本性变化的模式，表明候选人的注意力对外界影响很敏感？ 也许最重要的是，谁，如果有的话，能够影响候选人对问题的关注？ 他们的对手？ 大众媒体？ 或者是他们在讨好的选民？在这个项目中，调查员使用一个动态框架来跟踪候选人在2000年、2004年和2008年总统竞选期间对问题的关注，从而解决上述问题。 根据议程设定学者之前的工作，研究人员建议候选人？对问题的注意力将遵循鲍姆加特纳和琼斯（1993，2005）的间断平衡理论（即注意力将发生根本性变化），并且问题注意力容易受到外部影响。 这些索赔进行评估，使用描述性分布分析的变化模式的候选人问题的注意力在三个运动的过程中。 然后，调查员检查哪些问题受到候选人，主流媒体和公众的关注，以评估一个演员的关注可以影响其他演员的关注程度。 这项研究之所以重要，有几个原因。 首先，它将提供理论和经验的贡献，我们的总统竞选，广告设置，并在政府的互动关系的动态的理解。 第二，有证据表明，候选人各自的议程遵循的稳定性和标点符号的模式，类似于在其他研究中发现的问题设置将进一步我们的理解如何达到最前沿的运动。 最后，通过考察候选人的竞选纲领是否受到外部因素的影响，可以判断候选人是否完全掌握竞选活动的议题内容，是否对媒体和公众的要求做出了回应。本研究还具有广泛的影响，这些影响体现在研究者将公开的新数据集中，以供今后的学术研究使用。 这些数据将有助于深入了解总统竞选活动和议程的动态，但也为实证研究竞选活动与公共政策之间的联系提供了基础。此外，这些数据将有助于进一步研究政府的反应能力以及公共政策和公众舆论之间的联系。 最后，该项目还提供了几个本科政治科学家接受先进的研究实践，数据收集，自动化编码和实证分析的培训和经验的潜力。