Longitudinal analysis of televised U.S. primary and general election presidential debates

1. They’re Not ‘Just’ Words:
The Verbal Style of Televised U.S. Presidential Debates
David Lynn Painter & Juliana Fernandes

2. Literature Review: U.S. Presidential Debates
• Most watched (& researched?)
political events in history
• Most analyses focus on
general elections; particular
cycles and/or candidates
• This longitudinal investigation
analyzes the verbal tone of
debate rhetoric by election
level, party, & decade

3. Verbal Tone of U.S. Presidential Debates
• Traditionally,
• Verbal tone was either positive,
negative, or mixed/contrast
• Content was either issue or image
• Functional Theory – acclaims,
attacks, and defenses
• DICTION software analyzes verbal
style or tone by searching for 10,000
terms, sorting them into 36 dictionaries
or categories, and calculating 5 master
variables: Certainty, Optimism, Activity,
Realism, and Commonality

4. Research Questions
1. Differences between primary
and general election
presidential debates?
2. Differences Republican and
Democratic presidential
debate rhetoric?
3. Differences over past 6
decades?
4. Interaction effects: election
level, partisanship, decade

5. Method: Sample
The 138 debate transcripts were separated by major candidate party, resulting in 563 documents
Each document also coded for the following independent variables:
candidate, election level, candidate party, year, and decade
33 General
Election
Debates
(1960-2016)
66
Republican
Primary
Debates
39
Democratic
Primary
Debates
138 Debates
Presidential Debates Transcripts from the American Presidency Project Website
(2000 – 2016)

6. Method: Diction Text-Analysis
• Diction searches texts
for 10,000 terms, sorts
them into 35
dictionaries or
categories and
calculates 5 master
variables
Unit of Analysis
• 500-words segments
of each text (N=563),
which returned N=
2,184 units of analysis.

7. Results:
RQ1 Verbal Tone between Primary and General Elections
MANOVA
Wilks’ Λ = .92, F (5, 557) =9.090, p < .001
ANOVAs
47.78
50.08
49.48
50.94
49.36
49.13
52.35
49.07
51.66
49.53
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
Certainty Optimism Activity Realism Commonality
Master Variable
Primary
General
Optimism: F (1, 561) = 22.123, p < .05
Certainty: F (1, 561) = 11.081, p < .05
Realism: F (1, 561) = 4.251, p < .05

8. Results:
RQ2 Verbal Tone between Republican and Democrats
MANOVA
Wilks’ Λ = .97, F (5, 557) = 2.428, p < .05)
ANOVAs
47.59
50.62
50.04
51.34
49.88
48.1
50.23
49.15
50.88
48.92
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
Certainty Optimism Activity Realism Commonality
Master Variable
Democrat
Republican
Commonality: F (1, 547) = 6.187, p < .05

9. Results:
RQ3 Verbal Tone of U.S. Presidential Debate Rhetoric across Decades
MANOVA
Wilks’ Λ = .91, F (25, 2055) =
2.057, p <.01
ANOVAs
Certainty: (F (5, 557) = 6.487, p
< .001)
51.22
52.67
49.66
48.85
47.58
48.03
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
1960s 1970s 1980s 1990s 2000s 2010s
VERBAL TONE ACROSS DECADES
Activity Optimism Certainty Realism Commonality
1960s > 2000s
1970s > 2000s
1970s > 2010s

10. Results:
RQ4 Interaction Effects of Election Level, Party and Decade
ANOVA
Optimism
Election level x Decade
(F (1, 547) = 5.663, p < .05)
Pairwise Comparisons
2000: General > Primary
(F (1, 547) = 21.945, p < .01)
This result was driven by Al Gore in 2000
General > Primary
(F (1, 11) = 4.79, p < .05).
2000 2010
Gen Prim Gen Prim
Optimism 54.09a 49.70a 51.24 50.23
DEM 54.52a 49.97a 51.40 50.97
GOP 53.61b 49.97b 51.09 50.14
a Differences between general and primary debates significant, p < .01
b Differences between general and primary debates significant, p < .05
Table 4: Interaction Effects on Optimism by Decade

11. Results:
RQ4 Interaction Effects of Election Level, Party and Decade
ANOVA
Realism
Party x Level (F (1, 547) = 7.034, p < .05)
Party x Decade (F (1, 547) = 3.087, p < .05)
Party x Level x Decade (F (1, 547) = 11.378, p < .05
Realism was stable across decades, except in the
2010s when Republicans used more realism than
Democrats, but only during the general election
Donald Trump
Trump’s Primary < Trump’s General
Trump’s Primary < Total Primary
Trump’s General > Total General
2000 2010
Gen Prim Gen Prim
Realism 51.36 50.98 53.37a 50.89a
DEM 51.97 51.29 50.55 51.35
GOP 50.68 50.74 56.20a 50.83a
Table 4: Interaction Effects on Realism by Decade
a Differences between general and primary debates significant, p < .01
b Differences between general and primary debates significant, p < .05

12. Discussion: Results Summary
Main Effects
1. GE debates more optimism, certainty,
and realism than primary debates
2. Dems use more commonality than GOP
3. 1960-70s more certainty than last 2
decades
Interaction Effects
1. In 2000s, GE debates more optimistic
than primary debates
2. GOP rhetoric in 2010s more realism than
Dems in GE debates

13. Discussion: Implications, Limitations, Future
• Realism variable distinct from
realistic
• Trump’s unconstrained rhetoric
reflects populist appeal
• Rhetoric is powerful tool in
debates
• They’re not “just” words
• Relevant for our assimilation of
political information
• How words add lexical weight to
candidates’ messages