Caveat orator: Audience disaffiliation in the 1988 presidential debates

Displaying Group Cohesiveness: Humour and Laughter in the Public Lectures of Management Gurus

“…These gurus are renowned for their public performances and represent a range of popular ideas that have had a major impact on organisational life in the last fifteen years. The recordings are drawn from the following commercially produced training packages: Tom Peters - The data are analysed using the approach and findings of CA research into public speaking (e.g., Atkinson, 1984a and b;Heritage and Greatbatch, 1986;Clayman, 1992Clayman, , 1993Mcllvenny, 1996). CA involves detailed, qualitative analysis of audio and video recordings of naturally occurring social interactions (Atkinson and Heritage, 1984;Zimmerman, 1988;Boden and Zimmerman, 1991;Heritage, 1995;Psathas, 1995).…”

“…First, several researchers have developed Atkinson"s work by examining not only applause (e.g., Heritage and Greatbatch, 1986;Bull, 1986);Brodine, 1986;Grady and Potter, 1985) but also audience laughter (Clayman, 1992) and booing and heckling (e.g. Clayman, 1993;Mcllvenny, 1996).…”

“Please Clap”: Applause, Laughter, and Booing during the 2016 GOP Presidential Primary Debates

“…In those rare cases where booing occurs, audience members apparently do so only in response to attacks by a candidate or perceived aff ronts to their preferred contender. In other words, booing can be a defensive gesture employed by supporters within a politically mixed audience (Clayman 1992 ). On the other hand, affiliative booing-booing that is invited through attacks on out-groups and policy positions (Bull and Miskinis 2014)-may occur as well, although its presence during presidential debates has not been noted in the academic literature.…”

“…To a much lesser extent, booing has been observed in political events (Bull and Miskinis 2014;Clayman 1992 ;1993 ). In those rare cases where booing occurs, audience members apparently do so only in response to attacks by a candidate or perceived aff ronts to their preferred contender.…”

“…Due to the contagious nature of audience response and the mutual monitoring amongst group members (Bull 2003 ), applause, laughter, and booing may be influenced by the nature of the audience as well as other factors such as seating arrangements, acoustics, and instructions from debate moderators (Stewart 2012 ;. However, even ideologically diverse audiences may have their applause, laughter, and booing enabled by their being clustered next to each other (Clayman 1992 ).…”