Building an ICCN Multimodal Classifier of Aggressive Political Debate Style: Towards a Computational Understanding of Candidate Performance Over Time

References

• Alexander, J. C. (2011). Performance and power. Polity Press.
   Google Scholar
• Andrew, G., Arora, R., Bilmes, J., & Livescu, K. (2013). Deep canonical correlation analysis. Proceedings of Machine Learning Research 28(3):1247–1255. https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.5555/3042817.3043076
   Google Scholar
• Boussalis, C., & Coan, T. G. (2021). Facing the electorate: Computational approaches to the study of nonverbal communication and voter impression formation. Political Communication, 38(1–2), 75–97. https://doi.org/10.1080/10584609.2020.1784327
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boussalis, C., Coan, T. G., Holman, M. R., & Müller, S. (2021). Gender, candidate emotional expression, and voter reactions during televised debates. American Political Science Review, 115(4), 1242–1257. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003055421000666
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boydstun, A. E., Glazier, R. A., & Pietryka, M. T. (2013). Playing to the crowd: Agenda control in presidential debates. Political Communication, 30(2), 254–277. https://doi.org/10.1080/10584609.2012.737423
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brubaker, R. (2017). Why populism? Theory and Society, 46(5), 357–385. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11186-017-9301-7
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bucy, E. P. (2016). The look of losing, then and now: Nixon, Obama, and nonverbal indicators of opportunity lost. American Behavioral Scientist, 60(14), 1772–1798. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764216678279
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bucy, E. P. (2022). Embodied politics and emotional expression in the populist era: Research advances amid a disruptive decade. In K. Döveling & E. Konijn (Eds.), Routledge international handbook of emotions and media, 2e (pp. 247–266). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429465758-16
   Google Scholar
• Bucy, E. P., Foley, J. M., Lukito, J., Doroshenko, L., Shah, D. V., Pevehouse, J. C., & Wells, C. (2020). Performing populism: Trump’s transgressive debate style and the dynamics of Twitter response. New Media and Society, 22(4), 634–658. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444819893984
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bucy, E. P., & Gong, Z. H. (2018). In/Appropriate aggression in presidential debate: How Trump’s nonverbal displays intensified verbal norm violations in 2016. In C. Senior (Ed.), The facial displays of leaders (pp. 73–95). Palgrave MacMillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-94535-4_4
   Google Scholar
• Bucy, E. P., Shah, D. V., Sun, Z., Sethares, W., Borah, P., Kim, S. J., & Duan, Z. (2022). Detecting Nonverbal Aggression in Presidential Debate: A Demonstration and Rationale for a CCSE Presidential Debate Data Co-op. In R. X. Browning, (Ed.), Democracy and the Media: The Year in C-SPAN Archives Research (Vol. 8, pp. 239–253). Purdue University Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv33t5gjm.15
   Google Scholar
• Bucy, E. P., & Stewart, P. A. (2018). The personalization of campaigns: Nonverbal cues in presidential debates. In W. R. Thompson (Ed.), Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Politics. Oxford University Press. Gen. https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190228637.013.52
   Google Scholar
• Chen, H. T. (2021). Second screening and the engaged public: The role of second screening for news and political expression in an OSROR model. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 98(2), 526–546. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077699019866432
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cheng, M. (2020). Acclaims, attacks, defenses: Critical discourse analysis of Ma Ying-jeou’s 2012 Taiwan presidential debates discourse. Discourse & Society, 31(1), 19–43. https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926519877696
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cho, J., Shah, D. V., Nah, S., & Brossard, D. (2009). “Split screens” and “spin rooms”: Debate modality, post-debate coverage, and the new videomalaise. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 53(2), 242–261. https://doi.org/10.1080/08838150902907827
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Devlin, J., Chang, M.-W., Lee, K., & Toutanova, K. (2018). Bert: Pre-training of deep bidirectional transformers for language understanding. arXiv preprint arXiv:1810.04805.
   Google Scholar
• Dietrich, B. J., Hayes, M., & O’Brien, D. Z. (2019). Pitch perfect: Vocal pitch and the emotional intensity of congressional speech. American Political Science Review, 113(4), 941–962. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003055419000467
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Druckman, J. (2003). The power of television images: The first Kennedy-Nixon debate revisited. The Journal of Politics, 65(2), 559–571. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2508.t01-1-00015
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Engesser, S., Fawzi, N., & Larsson, A. O. (2017). Populist online communication. Information, Community & Society, 20(9), 1279–1292. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2017.1328525
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Engzell, P., & Rohrer, J. (2021). Improving social science: Lessons from the open science movement. PS: Political Science & Politics, 54(2), 297–300. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1049096520000967
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Everitt, J., Best, L. A., & Gaudet, D. (2016). Candidate gender, behavioral style, and willingness to vote: Support for female candidates depends on conformity to gender norms. American Behavioral Scientist, 60(14), 1737–1755. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764216676244
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Feng, G. C. (2015). Mistakes and how to avoid mistakes in using intercoder reliability indices. Methodology: European Journal of Research Methods for the Behavioral and Social Sciences, 11(1), 13–22. https://doi.org/10.1027/1614-2241/a000086
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Geer, J. G. (2006). In defense of negativity: Attack ads in presidential campaigns. University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hall, K., Goldstein, D. M., & Ingram, M. B. (2016). The hands of Donald Trump: Entertainment, gesture, spectacle. Hau: Journal of Ethnographic Theory, 6(2), 71–100. https://doi.org/10.14318/hau6.2.009
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hargrave, L., & Langengen, T. (2021). The gendered debate: Do men and women communicate differently in the house of commons? Politics & Gender, 17(4), 580–606. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1743923X20000100
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Herbst, S. (2010). Rude democracy: Civility and incivility in American politics. Temple University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Jamieson, K. H., Volinsky, A., Weitz, I., & Kenski, K. (2017). The political uses and abuses of civility and incivility. In The Oxford Handbook of Political Communication (pp. 205–218). Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Joo, J., Bucy, E. P., & Seidel, C. (2019). Automated coding of televised leader displays: Detecting nonverbal political behavior with computer vision. International Journal of Communication, 13, 4044–4066. https://ijoc.org/index.php/ijoc/article/view/10725
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kang, Z., Indudhara, C., Mahorker, K., Bucy, E. P., & Joo, J. (2020). Understanding political communication styles in televised debates via body movements. In A. Bartoli & A. Fusiello (Eds.), Computer vision: ECCV 2020 workshops, Lecture notes in Computer Science (Vol. 12535, pp. 788–793). Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-66415-2_55
   Google Scholar
• Kenski, K., & Stroud, N. J. (2005). Who watches presidential debates? A comparative analysis of presidential debate viewing in 2000 and 2004. American Behavioral Scientist, 49(2), 213–228. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764205279423
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Koppensteiner, M., & Grammer, K. (2010). Motion patterns in political speech and their influence on personality ratings. Journal of Research in Personality, 44(3), 374–379. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2010.04.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Koppensteiner, M., Stephan, P., & Jäschke, J. P. M. (2016). Moving speeches: Dominance, trustworthiness, and competence in body motion. Personality and Individual Differences, 94, 101–106. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2016.01.013
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lang, K., & Lang, G. E. (1961). Ordeal by debate: Viewer reactions. Public Opinion Quarterly, 25(2), 277–288. https://doi.org/10.1086/267020
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liebenthal, E., Silbersweig, D. A., & Stern, E. (2016). The language, tone and prosody of emotions: Neural substrates and dynamics of spoken-word emotion perception. Frontiers in Neuroscience, 10, 506. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnins.2016.00506
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lukito, J., Sarma, P., Foley, J., Abhishek, A., Bucy, E., Doroshenko, L., & Shah, D. (2021). Resonant moments in media events: Discursive shifts, agenda control, and twitter dynamics in the first Clinton-Trump debate. Journal of Quantitative Description: Digital Media, 1. https://doi.org/10.51685/jqd.2021.019
   Google Scholar
• Masters, R. D., Sullivan, D. G., Lanzetta, J. T., McHugo, G. J., & Englis, B. G. (1986). The facial displays of leaders: Toward an ethology of human politics. Journal of Social and Biological Structures, 9(4), 319–343. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-17508690190-9
   Google Scholar
• McKinney, M. S., & Warner, B. R. (2013). Do presidential debates matter? Examining a decade of campaign debate effects. Argumentation & Advocacy, 49(4), 238–258. https://doi.org/10.1080/00028533.2013.11821800
   Google Scholar
• Moffit, B. (2016). The global rise of populism: Performance, political style, and representation. Stanford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Mutz, D. (2015). In-your-face politics: The consequences of uncivil media. Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Neudert, L. M., Howard, P., & Kollanyi, B. (2019). Sourcing and automation of political news and information during three European elections. Social Media+ Society, 5(3), 2056305119863147. https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305119863147
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Norris, P., & Inglehart, R. (2019). Cultural backlash: Trump, Brexit, and authoritarian populism. Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Schroeder, A. (2008). Presidential debates: Fifty years of high-risk TV. Columbia University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Seiter, J. S., & Weger, H., Jr. (2020). Nonverbal communication in political debates. Lexington Books.
   Google Scholar
• Shah, D. V., Hanna, A., Bucy, E. P., Lassen, D. S., Van Thomme, J., Bialik, K., Yang, J., & Pevehouse, J. C. (2016). Dual screening during presidential debates: Political nonverbals and the volume and valence of online expression. American Behavioral Scientist, 60(14), 1816–1843. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764216676245
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stromer-Galley, J., & Bryant, L. (2011). Agenda control in the 2008 CNN/YouTube debates. Communication Quarterly, 59(5), 529–546. https://doi.org/10.1080/01463373.2011.614212
   Google Scholar
• Sun, Z., Sarma, P., Sethares, W., & Bucy, E. P. (2019, September). Multimodal Sentiment Analysis Using Deep Canonical Correlation Analysis. Paper presented to the International Speech Communication Association, INTERSPEECH 2019.
   Google Scholar
• Sun, Z., Sarma, P., Sethares, W., & Liang, Y. (2020, April). Learning relationships between text, audio, and video via deep canonical correlation for multimodal language analysis. Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 34(5), 8992–8999. https://doi.org/10.1609/aaai.v34i05.6431
   Google Scholar
• Wicks, R. H., Stewart, P. A., Eubanks, A. D., Eidelman, S., & Dye, R. G. (2017). Visual presentation style 1: A test of visual presentation styles and candidate evaluation during the first 2016 presidential debate. American Behavioral Scientist, 61(5), 533–544. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764217704317
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wu, P. Y., & Mebane, W. R., Jr. (2022). MARMOT: A deep learning framework for constructing multimodal representations for vision-and-language tasks. Computational Communication Research, 4(1). https://doi.org/10.5117/CCR2022.1.008.WU
   Google Scholar