Search

Examines the influence of party affiliation on voter learning and perceptions of candidates' images and issue stances; the manner in which image-based cognitions interact with learning; and the way image and issue perceptions are interrelated in voters' minds. Indicates that image and issue perceptions interact and are often integrated via judgments of candidate performance. (PA)

This study assesses the usefulness of voters' emotions toward presidential candidates in predicting voter attitudes toward, involvement with, and learning of the candidates' statements at a debate. Three different models of the effects of emotions, including the bipolar model, Marcus and MacKuen's (1993) two-dimensional model, and a discrete emotions model were tested for their efficacy in predicting the responses of 81 participants who watched the 2000 Presidential Debate at Wake Forest University. Overall, the bipolar model in which positive and negative emotion terms fall along one continuum of affective valence was most consistent with the data. With regard to both presidential candidates, the more positive the emotion felt toward the candidate, the more positive the voters' attitudes were toward that candidate. Likewise, attitudes predicted greater involvement with the candidates, which subsequently predicted greater learning from the candidate at the debate.

Analyzes the present nature of topicality argumentation. Argues for an alternative view of topicality as jurisdiction, balancing resolutional ground and focusing debaters' attention and arguments on central substantive policy issues implied by the resolution under consideration. Concludes with an application of the jurisdiction analogy to contemporary topicality argumentation. (MM)

Extemporaneous speaking has long been a cornerstone event in competitive forensic. According to public speaking scholars, organization is of paramount importance in determining the success of a speech. This experimental study examines judges (N=66) responses to two extemporaneous speeches. The results indicated that experienced judges who viewed the speech without a numerated preview and review, which the forensic world considers the normative structure, rated the speech as being poorer than the group that had the normative structure present. Experienced judges also rated the two speeches as significantly different on the speech rating criteria of analysis when that factor was held constant. The findings also show that judges of high experience are more punitive in their scoring of the speech that does not meet the normative organization pattern. This research points to a strong normative convention governing the extemporaneous speaking event. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]