Hostname: page-component-89b8bd64d-x2lbr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-10T18:43:48.003Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

“Happy warriors” Revisited: Hedonic and agonic display repertoires of presidential candidates on the evening news

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 May 2016

Erik P. Bucy  and
Maria Elizabeth Grabe
Erik P. Bucy
Affiliation:
ebucy@indiana.edu
Maria Elizabeth Grabe
Affiliation:
mgrabe@indiana.edu Department of Telecommunications Indiana University 1229 East Seventh Street Bloomington, Indiana 47405 USA

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the 'Save PDF' action button.

Absent from most analyses of political news are detailed assessments of the candidates' nonverbal behavior, which has been shown experimentally to have considerable persuasive influence. Unlike attractiveness and other relatively stable aspects of appearance, facial displays are highly variable and reveal important moment-to-moment information about the emitter's internal state. In this paper we argue that facial displays are influential elements within political news and examine the character of televised candidate displays over four presidential election cycles. The analysis considers coverage of major party nominees shown during the general elections of 1992, 1996, 2000, and 2004 on the major broadcast networks (ABC, CBS, and NBC). To motivate our hypotheses, we draw on the biopolitics literature that has identified three classes of displays relevant to the study of nonverbal political behavior: happiness/reassurance, anger/threat, and fear/evasion. The analysis focuses on the relationship between the display types shown in election coverage, the context in which the displays are shown, and candidate standings in the polls.

Keywords

biopoliticshedonic and agonic behaviornetwork news coveragenonverbal communicationtelevised leader displays

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Politics and the Life Sciences , Volume 27 , Issue 1 , March 2008 , pp. 78 - 98
Copyright
Copyright © Association for Politics and the Life Sciences 

References

1. Ansolabehere, Stephen, Behr, Roy, and Iyengar, Shanto, The Media Game: American Politics in the Television Age (New York: Macmillan Publishing, 1993).Google Scholar
2. Friedman, Howard S., Mertz, Timothy I., and Robin DiMatteo, M., “Perceived bias in the facial expressions of television news broadcasters,” Journal of Communication 1980, 30(4):103–111.Google Scholar
3. Clayman, Steven E., “Defining moments, presidential debates, and the dynamics of quotability,” Journal of Communication 1995, 45(3):118–146.Google Scholar
4. Kurtz, Howard, “Reporters shift gears on the Dean bus; Iowa vote and outburst rewrite the campaign saga,” The Washington Post 23 January 2004, C1.Google Scholar
5. Druckman, James N., “The power of television images: The first Kennedy-Nixon debate revisited,” Journal of Politics 2003, 65(2):559–571.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6. Kraus, Sidney, “Winners of the first 1960 televised presidential debate between Kennedy and Nixon,” Journal of Communication 1996, 46(4):78–96.Google Scholar
7. Jamieson, Kathleen Hall, Eloquence in an Electronic Age: The Transformation of Political Speechmaking (New York: Oxford University Press, 1988).Google Scholar
8. Perloff, Richard M., Political Communication: Politics, Press, and Public in America (Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1998).Google Scholar
9. Masters, Roger D. and Sullivan, Dennis G., “Nonverbal behavior and leadership: Emotion and cognition in political information processing,” in Explorations in Political Psychology , Iyengar, Shanto and McGuire, William J., eds. (Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 1993), pp. 150–182.Google Scholar
10. Patterson, Miles L., Churchill, Mary E., Burger, Gary K., and Powell, Jack L., “Verbal and nonverbal modality effects on impressions of political candidates: Analysis from the 1984 presidential debates,” Communication Monographs 1992, 59:231–242.Google Scholar
11. Bucy, Erik P., “Emotional and evaluative consequences of inappropriate leader displays,” Communication Research 2000, 27(2):194–226.Google Scholar
12. Bucy, Erik P. and Bradley, Samuel D., “Presidential expressions and viewer emotion: Counterempathic responses to televised leader displays,” Social Science Information/Information sur les Sciences Sociales 2004, 43(1):59–94.Google Scholar
13. Masters, Roger D., “Cognitive neuroscience, emotion, and leadership,” in Citizens and Politics: Perspectives from Political Psychology , Kuklinski, James H., ed. (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2001), pp. 68–102.Google Scholar
14. Masters, Roger D., “Primate politics and political theory,” in Primate Politics , Schubert, G. and Masters, Roger D., eds. (Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press, 1991), pp. 221–247.Google Scholar
15. Bucy, Erik P. and Grabe, Maria Elizabeth, “Taking television seriously: A sound and image bite analysis of presidential campaign coverage, 1992–2004,” journal of Communication 2007, 57:652–675.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
16. Ibid. Google Scholar
17. Masters, and Sullivan, , “Nonverbal behavior and leadership: Emotion and cognition in political information processing.” Google Scholar
18. Somit, Albert and Peterson, Steven A., “Biopolitics after three decades: A balance sheet,” British Journal of Political Science 1998, 28:559–571.Google Scholar
19. Lanzetta, John T., Sullivan, Dennis G., Masters, Roger D., and McHugo, Gregory J., “Emotional and cognitive responses to televised images of political leaders,” in Mass Media and Political Thought: An Information-Processing Approach , Kraus, Sidney and Perloff, Richard M., eds. (Beverly Hills: Sage, 1985), pp. 85–116.Google Scholar
20. Eibl-Eibesfeldt, Irenaus, Human Ethology (New York: Aldine de Gruyter, 1989).Google Scholar
21. Masters, Roger D., Sullivan, Dennis G., Feola, Alice, and McHugo, Gregory J., “Television coverage of candidates' display behavior during the 1984 Democratic primaries in the United States,” International Political Science Review 1987, 8(2):121–130.Google Scholar
22. Way, Baldwin M. and Masters, Roger D., “Political attitudes: Interactions of cognition and affect,” Motivation and Emotion 1996, 20(3):205–236.Google Scholar
23. Masters, and Sullivan, , “Nonverbal behavior and leadership: Emotion and cognition in political information processing.” Google Scholar
24. Lanzetta, et al., “Emotional and cognitive responses to televised images of political leaders.” Google Scholar
25. Masters, Roger D., The Nature of Politics (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1989).Google Scholar
26. Way, and Masters, , “Political attitudes: Interactions of cognition and affect.” Google Scholar
27. Chance, Michael R. A., “Attention structures as the basis of primate rank orders,” in The Social Structure of Attention , Chance, Michael R. A. and Larson, Ray R., eds. (New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1976), pp. 11–28.Google Scholar
28. Kortmulder, Koenraad and Robbers, Yuri, The Agonic and Hedonic Styles of Social Behaviour (London: Edwin Mellen Press, 2005).Google Scholar
29. Masters, et al., “Television coverage of candidates' display behavior during the 1984 Democratic primaries in the United States.” Google Scholar
30. Masters, Roger D., Frey, Siegfried, and Bente, Gary, “Dominance and attention: Images of leaders in German, French, and American TV news,” Polity 1991, 25:373–394.Google Scholar
31. Sullivan, Dennis G. and Masters, Roger D., “Biopolitics, the media, and leadership: Nonverbal cues, emotions, and trait attributions in the evaluation of leaders,” in Research in Biopolitics , Somit, Albert and Peterson, Steven A., eds., Vol. 2 (Greenwich, CT: JAI Press, 1994), pp. 237–273.Google Scholar
32. Ekman, Paul, Emotion in the Human Face (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1982).Google Scholar
33. Sullivan, Dennis G. and Masters, Roger D., with Lanzetta, John T., McHugo, Gregory J., Englis, Basil G., and Plate, Elise F., “Facial displays and political leadership: Some experimental findings,” in Primate Politics , Schubert, Glendon and Masters, Roger D., eds. (Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press, 1991), pp. 188–206.Google Scholar
34. Masters, Roger D., Sullivan, Dennis G., Lanzetta, John T., McHugo, Gregory J., and Englis, Basil G., “Facial displays and political leadership,” Journal of Biological and Social Structures 1986, 9:319–343.Google Scholar
35. Sullivan, et al., “Facial displays and political leadership: Some experimental findings.” Google Scholar
36. Bucy, and Bradley, , “Presidential expressions and viewer emotion: Counterempathic responses to televised leader displays.” Google Scholar
37. Ekman, Paul and Friesen, Wallace V., “Felt, false, and miserable smiles,” Journal of Nonverbal Behavior 1982, 6:238–258.Google Scholar
38. Masters, et al., “Facial displays and political leadership.” Google Scholar
39. Masters, Roger D., “Linking ethology and political science: Photographs, political attention, and presidential elections,” New Directions for Methodology of Social and Behavioral Science 1981, 7:61–80.Google Scholar
40. Kurtz, , “Reporters shift gears on the Dean bus; Iowa vote and outburst rewrite the campaign saga.” Google Scholar
41. Sullivan, et al., “Facial displays and political leadership: Some experimental findings.” Google Scholar
42. Masters, et al., “Facial displays and political leadership.” Google Scholar
43. Sullivan, et al., “Facial displays and political leadership: Some experimental findings.” Google Scholar
44. Masters, and Sullivan, , “Nonverbal behavior and leadership: Emotion and cognition in political information processing.” Google Scholar
45. Bucy, , “Emotional and evaluative consequences of inappropriate leader displays.” Google Scholar
46. Masters, , “Cognitive neuroscience, emotion, and leadership.” Google Scholar
47. Bucy, Erik P., “Emotion, presidential communication, and traumatic news: Processing the World Trade Center attacks,” Harvard International Journal of Press/Politics 2003, 8(4):76–96.Google Scholar
48. Benjamin, Daniel J. and Shapiro, Jesse M., “Thin-slice forecasts of gubernatorial elections,” Review of Economics and Statistics , in press.Google Scholar
49. Sullivan, et al., “Facial displays and political leadership: Some experimental findings.” Google Scholar
50. Bucy, Erik P. and Newhagen, John E., “The emotional appropriateness heuristic: Processing televised presidential reactions to the news,” Journal of Communication 1999, 49(4):59–79.Google Scholar
51. Sullivan, and Masters, , “Biopolitics, the media, and leadership: Nonverbal cues, emotions, and trait attributions in the evaluation of leaders.” Google Scholar
52. Bucy, and Newhagen, , “The emotional appropriateness heuristic: Processing televised presidential reactions to the news.” Google Scholar
53. Benjamin, and Shapiro, , “Thin-slice forecasts of gubernatorial elections.” Google Scholar
54. Todorov, Alexander, Mandisodza, Anesu N., Goren, Amir, and Hall, Crystal C., “Inferences of competence from faces predict election outcomes,” Science 2005, 308(10): 1623–1626.Google Scholar
55. Benjamin, and Shapiro, , “Thin-slice forecasts of gubernatorial elections.” Google Scholar
56. Ambady, Nalini and Rosenthal, Robert, “Thin slices of expressive behavior as predictors of interpersonal consequences: A meta-analysis,” Psychological Bulletin , 1992, 111(2):256–274.Google Scholar
57. Benjamin, and Shapiro, , “Thin-slice forecasts of gubernatorial elections.” Google Scholar
58. Masters, et al., “Facial displays and political leadership.” Google Scholar
59. Sullivan, Dennis G. and Masters, Roger D., “‘Happy warriors’: Leaders' facial displays, viewers' emotions, and political support,” American Journal of Political Science 1988, 32(2):345–368.Google Scholar
60. Bucy, and Bradley, , “Presidential expressions and viewer emotion: Counterempathic responses to televised leader displays.” Google Scholar
61. Lanzetta, et al., “Emotional and cognitive responses to televised images of political leaders.” Google Scholar
62. Bucy, , “Emotional and evaluative consequences of inappropriate leader displays.” Google Scholar
63. Benjamin, and Shapiro, , “Thin-slice forecasts of gubernatorial elections.” Google Scholar
64. Masters, , Frey, , and Bente, , “Dominance and attention: Images of leaders in German, French, and American TV news.” Google Scholar
65. Babchuk, Wayne A., Hames, Raymond B., and Thompson, Ross A., “Sex differences in the recognition of infant facial expressions of emotion: The primary caretaker hypothesis,” Ethology and Sociobiology 1985, 6:89–101.Google Scholar
66. Masters, , The Nature of Politics .Google Scholar
67. Chance, , “Attention structures as the basis of primate rank orders.” Google Scholar
68. Sullivan, and Masters, , “‘Happy warriors’: Leaders' facial displays, viewers' emotions, and political support.” Google Scholar
69. Ibid. Google Scholar
70. Brody, Richard A., Assessing the President: The Media, Elite Opinion, and Political Support (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1991).Google Scholar
71. Mullen, Brian, Futrell, David, Stairs, Debbie, Tice, Dianne M., Dawson, Kathryn E., Riordan, Catherine A., and Kennedy, John G., et al., “Newscasters' facial expressions and voting behavior of viewers: Can a smile elect a president?” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 1986, 51(2):291–295.Google Scholar
72. Masters, , “Cognitive neuroscience, emotion, and leadership.” Google Scholar
73. Sullivan, and Masters, , “‘Happy warriors’: Leaders' facial displays, viewers' emotions, and political support.” Google Scholar
74. Masters, Roger D. and Sullivan, Dennis G., “Nonverbal displays and political leadership in France and the United States,” Political Behavior 1989, 11:121–153.Google Scholar
75. McHugo, Gregory J., Lanzetta, John T., and Bush, Lauren K., “The effect of attitudes on emotional reactions to expressive displays of political leaders,” Journal of Nonverbal Behavior 1991, 15:19–41.Google Scholar
76. Ekman, Paul, Emotions Revealed: Recognizing Faces and Feelings to Improve Communication and Emotional Life (New York: Henry Holt and Company, 2003).Google Scholar
77. Masters, et al., “Television coverage of candidates' display behavior during the 1984 Democratic primaries in the United States.” Google Scholar
78. Sullivan, and Masters, , “‘Happy warriors’: Leaders' facial displays, viewers' emotions, and political support.” Google Scholar
79. Masters, et al., “Television coverage of candidates' display behavior during the 1984 Democratic primaries in the United States.” Google Scholar
80. Patterson, et al., “Verbal and nonverbal modality effects on impressions of political candidates: Analysis from the 1984 presidential debates.” Google Scholar
81. Exline, Ralph V., “Multichannel transmission of nonverbal behavior and the perception of powerful men: The presidential debates of 1976,” in Power, Dominance, and Nonverbal Behavior , Ellyson, Steve L. and Dovidio, John F., eds. (New York: Springer-Verlag, 1985), pp. 183–206.Google Scholar
82. Nyhan, David, “Dole's blinkmanship,” The Boston Globe 9 October 1996, A27.Google Scholar
83. Center for Media and Public Affairs, “They're no friends of Bill: TV news coverage of the Clinton administration,” Media Monitor , 1994, 8(4):5–6.Google Scholar
84. Hayden, Joseph, Covering Clinton: The President and the Press in the 1990s (Westport, CT: Praeger, 2001).Google Scholar
85. Moore, Mark P., “The Quayle quagmire': Political campaigns in the poetic form of burlesque,” Western Journal of Communication 1992, 56(2):108–124.Google Scholar
86. Masters, , “Linking ethology and political science: Photographs, political attention, and presidential elections.” Google Scholar
87. Masters, Roger D., “The impact of ethology on political science,” in Biology and Politics , Somit, Albert, ed. (The Hague: Mouton, 1976), pp. 197–233.Google Scholar
88. Masters, et al., “Television coverage of candidates' display behavior during the 1984 Democratic primaries in the United States.” Google Scholar
89. Ibid. Google Scholar
90. Ibid. Google Scholar
91. Ibid. Google Scholar
92. Ibid. Google Scholar
93. Project for Excellence in Journalism, The State of the News Media 2004: An Annual Report on American Journalism (2004), http://www.stateofthenewsmedia.org/2004.Google Scholar
94. Pew Research Center for the People and the Press, “The tough job of communicating with voters,” 5 February 2000, http://people-press.org/reports/display.php3?ReportID=46.Google Scholar
95. Bucy, and Grabe, , “Taking television seriously: A sound and image bite analysis of presidential campaign coverage, 1992–2004.” Google Scholar
96. Sullivan, et al., “Facial displays and political leadership: Some experimental findings.” Google Scholar
97. Masters, et al., “Facial displays and political leadership.” Google Scholar
98. Ekman, Paul and Rosenberg, Erika L., eds., What the Face Reveals: Basic and Applied Studies of Spontaneous Expression Using the Facial Action Coding System , 2nd ed. (New York: Oxford University Press, 2005).Google Scholar
99. Masters, et al., “Facial displays and political leadership.” Google Scholar
100. Sullivan, et al., “Facial displays and political leadership: Some experimental findings.” Google Scholar
101. Masters, et al., “Facial displays and political leadership.” Google Scholar
102. Center, Roper, “The American Enterprise. Trial heats: Nationally…” Public Perspective November/December 1992: 100–101.Google Scholar
103. Harris, John F., “In such a tight race, pollster sees a profit; N.J.-based business uses ‘robo calling,”’ The Washington Post , 31 October 2004, A5.Google Scholar
104. Kenner, David and Saletan, William, “Who nailed the election results? Automated pollsters,” Slate 9 December 2004, http://www.slate.com/toolbar.aspx?action=print&id=2110860.Google Scholar
105. Lance Tarrance, V. Jr., “The ABC's of the 2004 pre-election polls,” Public Perspective Online , February 2005, http://www.publicopinionpros.com/op_ed/2005/feb/tarrance.asp.Google Scholar
106. Masters, et al., “Television coverage of candidates' display behavior during the 1984 Democratic primaries in the United States.” Google Scholar
107. Sullivan, et al., “Facial displays and political leadership: Some experimental findings.” Google Scholar
108. Roseman, Ira J., Abelson, Robert P., and Ewing, Michael F., “Emotion and political cognition: Emotional appeals in political communication,” in Political Cognition: The 19th Annual Carnegie Symposium on Cognition , Lau, Richard R. and Sears, David O., eds. (Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1986), pp. 279–294.Google Scholar
109. Sullivan, and Masters, , “‘Happy warriors’: Leaders' facial displays, viewers' emotions, and political support.” Google Scholar
110. Graber, Doris A., Processing Politics: Learning from Television in the Internet Age (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2001).Google Scholar
111. Graber, Doris A., “Say it with pictures,” Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Sciences 1996, 546:85–96.Google Scholar
112. Sullivan, et al., “Facial displays and political leadership: Some experimental findings.” Google Scholar
113. Sullivan, Dennis G., “Emotional responses to the nonverbal behavior of French and American political leaders,” Political Behavior 1996, 18:311–325.Google Scholar
114. Lanzetta, et al., “Emotional and cognitive responses to televised images of political leaders.” Google Scholar
115. Sullivan, and Masters, , “Biopolitics, the media, and leadership: Nonverbal cues, emotions, and trait attributions in the evaluation of leaders.” Google Scholar
116. Ibid. Google Scholar
117. Sullivan, and Masters, , “‘Happy warriors’: Leaders' facial displays, viewers' emotions, and political support.” Google Scholar
118. Masters, , Frey, , and Bente, , “Dominance and attention: Images of leaders in German, French, and American TV news.” Google Scholar
119. Maria Elizabeth Grabe, “The SABC's coverage of the 1987 and 1989 elections: The matter of visual bias,” Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media , 1996, 40(1):1–27.Google Scholar
120. Grabe, Maria Elizabeth, “The liberal bias accusation against journalism: Contradictory evidence from a visual perspective,” paper presented to the International Communication Association, Visual Communication Division (San Francisco, May 2007).Google Scholar
121. Bracken, Cheryl C., “Presence and image quality: The case of high-definition television,” Media Psychology 2005, 7(2):191–205.Google Scholar
122. Masters, and Sullivan, , “Nonverbal behavior and leadership: Emotion and cognition in political information processing.” Google Scholar
123. Bucy, , “Emotional and evaluative consequences of inappropriate leader displays.” Google Scholar
124. Bucy, , “Emotion, presidential communication, and traumatic news: Processing the World Trade Center attacks.” Google Scholar
125. Benjamin, and Shapiro, , “Thin-slice forecasts of gubernatorial elections.” Google Scholar
126. Masters, , Frey, , and Bente, , “Dominance and attention: Images of leaders in German, French, and American TV news.” Google Scholar