The Short-Term Effect of Going Public

Abstract

This paper examines the direct, short-term effect of presidential communications on policy preferences. Using panel studies and post-speech surveys, I demonstrate that following a speech, public opinion changes in the direction of the president. This effect is strongest among people who watch the president. While the number of people who tune to the president may be small, indeed getting smaller over time, it is composed of people who participate in the political process, are more likely to affect it, and therefore are of interest to opinion leaders. The findings reveal that presidents are effective leaders of public opinion.

Making and Breaking Party Leaders? An Informational Theory of Temporary and Lasting Impacts of Prime Minister Debates in Spain

“…In fact, more often than not, the debates produce statistically significant shifts (both boosts and slumps) in the vote intentions of mainstream parties. Contrary to other work on the fleeting nature of these shifts (e.g., Cavari, ), we find that debates can influence vote intentions in substantively meaningful and statistically significant ways up to a year afterward.…”

“…From a party competition perspective, these speeches are certainly less interesting because they neglect the strategy chosen by the other side. Current research typically shows that public opinion shifts related to speeches and debates tends to be quick and short‐lived (see, e.g., Cavari, ), which casts doubt on the likelihood of speeches producing meaningful, long‐term change in public opinion.…”

Presidential Leadership of Public Opinion: An Embedded Survey Experiment

“…Finally, this study did not test for effect persistence. Other studies have detected short-term presidential leadership effects (Cavari, 2013), but experimental evidence raises the question of how long after the experimental treatment the effect lasts (Chong & Druckman, 2010). Hopefully the framework and findings reported here will stimulate more research on presidential leadership of public opinion.…”

“…But a second set of studies detects presidential communication effects, using either experimental (Conover & Sigelman, 1982;Druckman & Holmes, 2004;Rosen, 1973;Sigelman, 1980;Sigelman & Conover, 1981;Thomas & Sigelman, 1984) or observational designs (Cohen & Hamman, 2003, 2005Wood, 2007). Finally, a third set of studies takes a more nuanced approach, asking under what conditions presidential communication will move public opinion, for instance, when popularity is high, during the presidential honeymoon, or with major speeches (Cavari, 2013;Mondak, 1993;Mondak, Lewis, Sides, Kang, & Long, 2004;Rottinghaus, 2010;Tedin, Rottinghaus, & Rodgers, 2011).…”

Presidential Appeals to Moral Foundations: How Modern Presidents Persuade Cross‐Ideologues

“…Yet, modern presidents use the bully pulpit more frequently (Cohen, 2010;Edwards, 2003). While modern presidents may be able to persuade the public in particular situations (Cavari, 2013;Druckman & Holmes, 2004;Mondak, 1993;Page, Shapiro, & Dempsey, 1987;Tedin et al, 2010;Welch, 2003Welch, , 2007, public opinion may be too stable for presidents to shift through public campaigns (Edwards, 2003(Edwards, , 2009. Public opinion tends to change dramatically, in response to world events (Edwards, 2009;Page & Bouton, 2006;Page & Shapiro, 1992;Stimson, 2004).…”