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

长期以来，学者们一直认为，总统选举可以导致政治格局的戏剧性变化(Carmins&Amp；Stimson，1989)，并产生显著更高的政治参与度(McDonald&amp；Popkin，2001)。因此，候选人所采用的策略(Lau&amp；Pomper，2004年；Brader，2006年)以及这些策略对公众的影响受到了极大的关注(Ansolabhere等人)。1994、1995、1999)。然而，人们对解释这场运动的问题内容的关注相对较少。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被解决，口号是“这是经济，笨蛋！”(《作战室》1993)或《我们可以相信的改变》(Jamieson 2009)。但这些描述并没有解释当前背景之外发生的事情，也没有为竞选议程设置的更广泛理论提供多少帮助。人们仍然有几个问题：现代总统竞选活动对问题的关注模式是什么？候选人对问题的关注是否带有增量变化，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呈现出先稳定后剧烈变化的模式，这表明候选人的注意力对外部影响很敏感？也许最重要的是，如果有人的话，谁能够影响候选人对问题的关注？他们的对手？大众媒体？在这个项目中，调查者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。根据议程设置学者之前的工作，调查人员建议候选人？对问题的关注将遵循鲍姆加特纳和琼斯(1993,2005)的断断续续均衡理论(即注意力将以激进的变化为标志)，并且问题的注意力容易受到外部影响。使用描述性分布分析对候选人在三次竞选过程中引起关注的问题的变化模式进行评估。然后，调查人员检查候选人、主流媒体和公众关注的问题，以评估一个参与者的关注对其他参与者的关注的影响程度。这项研究之所以重要，有几个原因。首先，它将为我们理解总统竞选、议程设置和政府内部行为者之间的关系的动态提供理论和实证贡献。第二，有证据表明，候选人各自的议程遵循与其他议程设置研究中发现的类似的稳定性和标点符号模式，这将进一步加深我们对问题如何达到竞选首要地位的理解。第三，也是最后一点，这种对候选人各自议程的外部影响的审查将有助于解释候选人是否完全控制了竞选的议题内容，或者他们是否响应了大众媒体和公众的要求。这项研究也有几个更广泛的影响，体现在调查者将公开提供给未来学术研究的新数据集中。这些数据将提供对总统竞选和议程动态的洞察，也为实证检验竞选与公共政策之间的联系提供基础。此外，这些数据将有助于进一步加强关于政府响应以及公共政策和公众舆论之间联系的学术研究。最后，该项目还为几名本科生政治学家提供了在高级研究实践、数据收集、自动编码和实证分析方面的培训和经验。

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.