Attributing reasons to voting behaviour in the 2004 American election. A thematic analysis of British and American newspaper articles
...f the candidates motivations as internal/dispositional….or External/ situational? This brief review of the relevant literature and research shows the context in which the researchers intend to consider the articles, in order to identify differences and try to explain the differences. This study was to be carried out as a qualitative study, thus the research question is: What kinds of reasons do British and American newspapers attribute to voting behaviour in the 2004 American election? Method Four researchers were involved in this study, each a student of OU course DZX222 This is the first attempt at research of this kind for the author who is a British citizen, living in Scotland who has visited but does not have an extensive knowledge of the USA. No ethical issues seem to be involved in this study, as the basis is pre-existing material already freely available in the public domain. We ensured there were no such issues by evaluating the research proposal according to BPS guidelines and having the proposal checked and verified by a supervisory tutor assigned to the research team. This qualitative study involved the thematic textual analysis of articles printed in the mainstream press in the period following the result of the 2004 presidential elections. After reviewing the extensive amount of articles available, the researchers identified three newspapers articles from each of the two nations. The articles were chosen by negotiation between the researchers to give as close and fair a comparison as possible. This study was a first approach to this topic by these researchers. There were no pilot studies carried out beforehand. The four researchers and the supervisory tutors are all at different locations and have never met in person. This study was carried out using typed online communications. The researchers frequently met online via conferencing facility to agree on the research question and method and share and agree on findings. This was done over a period of 3 months (Nov 6th - Jan 6th2004). Month one was mainly taken up by the agreeing and refining of the proposed research, while the second month was mainly concerned with identifying and agreeing on relevant articles for the analysis, themes arising from the text and the identification and agreeing on of relevant quotes for each theme agreed. By early December, the researchers had agreed on 4 main themes, however had difficulty in labelling the themes (for example; should we look at religion or morality or both?) The researchers split into two groups, each group independently carrying out a qualitative thematic textual analysis of all the articles. This was done by applying the twin process of condensation and categorization in relation to the agreed themes. Working through each article, one theme was applied at a time and the supporting evidence (quotes from the text) for that theme were clearly identified. Once this was carried out, the reliability of the analysis was addressed by sharing findings, and engaging in discussion to reach a consensus. As this process began, the researchers began to disagree on the themes which were arising most strongly from the articles chosen and which should be used. There was much discussion in late December/ early January as to what main themes should be used to illustrate our findings. Three main themes were settled on after much debate in early January. Analysis The research question is: What kinds of reasons do British and American newspapers attribute to voting behaviour in the 2004 American election? Following the thematic analysis by the team, 3 main themes were raised as follows: Identification and Alienation, Attributing Reasons to Voting and Threats. Differences were found in the reasons that the articles from the two countries attributed to how the voters voted. These differences will be discussed under the headings of the three main themes. Identification and Alienation The researchers found evidence that the articles explained voter behaviour in relation to this theme, in particular there is evidence that American voters identified with the respective candidates personalities as well as with their policies and beliefs. Indeed the evidence gained to this effect was such that the researchers created a ‘sub-theme’ for personality (see appendix 3). There was a lot of reporting, particularly in the American articles that voters identified with the candidates because of religious/moral reasons and again a sub theme was created for this topic (see appendix 3). ‘.it was Mr. Bush, not…Kerry who shared their beliefs and understood their way of life’ (NYT (art 4) L7-9) ‘Moral values topped the list of issues voters were most concerned about …on election day.’ (Washington Times (art5) L1-2) ‘enthusiastic applause from voters when he talked about moral values’ (Washington Times L27-28) However feelings of alienation were portrayed in the articles which explained why voters had strongly turned against particular candidates For example it was suggested that voters felt alienated from the existing administration: ‘ They see the earth differently from up there on Spaceship Bush….even more then usually sealed off from outside criticism and realities’ (Guardian (art.2) L9-10. Or that voters felt alienated because of moral/religious reasons: ‘Democratic Party leaders have moved far away from the moral consensus in America’ (Washington Times (art.5) L65-66. The articles reported the Bush camp as deliberately using alienation as a tool, saying that because Kerry was from Massachusetts, he would not identify with the rest of America. ‘Massachusetts residents awoke yesterday to fresh evidence of the apparent gulf between this state and the much of the country’ (lines 14-15) and ‘a stereotype of “taxachusetts” as home to…..liberal elitists has gained traction nationwide……it proved useful to Bush’ (lines 23-27) Boston Globe (art.6 Attributing Reasons to Voting Much evidence was found to support this theme – on the sub theme of moral values and of personality, (already discussed) but also on; rejection of Massachusetts and it’s values (already discussed), Continuity and Circumstances. Continuity: ‘I almost did not vote for bush because he started that war in Iraq but then I figured… we’d better stay with him’ (L93-9) ‘I’d like to see him finish what he started’ (L97-98) Both NYT(art4) Circumstances: ‘These are not ordinary circumstances, indeed the context formed an essential part of the presidential debate’ ( Mail on Sunday L16-17). ‘Bush….expressed his intention to work with the EU, building on our shared values and interests, to promote development and progress, defeat terrorists and encourage freedom and democracy around the world’ (Guardian, L70-73 Threats This theme was supported by evidence relating to threats arising from within and out-with the US. Within : ‘The US has entered a dark age, in the grip of irrational Christian fundamentalism (Independent L3-4) ‘it seems like a sort of culture war’ (Boston Globe L5) ‘several said they feared he would appoint Supreme court judges who are too far to the right’ (NYT L28-29) External ‘Bush told the…people that they faced a crisis and would have to go to the limit if they were to defeat their dangerous enemies’ (Mail on Sunday lines 22-23). This showed Bush using external(situational) threats threats to bolster his vote. ‘Bush.. expressed his intention.. to defeat terrorists (Guardian lines 70-72) ‘Some voters made their decision to send...Bush back…because they were concerned about terrorism, others because they feared changing leaders in a time of war.’ (NYT lines1-3) Because of the constraints of this study and due to the nature of the study (qualitative) the above is only a flavour and is only one possible interpretation of what was found. The author does not intend this to be viewed as a definitive result. Discussion The conclusions from this study were that the majority of people who voted for Bush or Kerry identified with each individual in relation to their values and beliefs. However, it was also shown that the American voters identified with each individual’s personality and this influenced their voting behaviour. These findings are in line to some extent with Erikson’s psychosocial theory in that the voters identified with the person they saw as their ‘group’ leader. Feeling an affinity to the candidate (leader of social group) in terms of personality and values links the voter’s social identity and personality, making them feel secure in their social identity. The theories of social constructionism can be drawn on to explain the above, as the more people related to the candidates, the more powerful they would become politically. It is therefore in the candidate’s best interest to ensure they present themselves in such a way to be an identity that the majority would identify with. This can be done by making sure that their projected personality reflects the ways of thinking (values) of society. We can see that the candidates have done this by being explicit about what they stand for and what they believe in. In terms of Social Identity Theory, we have seen from the articles that the notion of in-group/ out-group has been used by candidates to bolster their vote and create divisions to their advantage by identifying themselves strongly with groups of voters (them and us). Notably, this was used as a tactic by Bush to alienate Kerry from a large section of voters by emphasising the fact that he was from Massachusetts (them) and highlighting the gulf between that state and ‘mainstream’ USA (us). Bush also made reference to external threats (out-group) and styling himself as the leader of the group (in-group) who would fight such threats. Generally speaking, American newspapers tended to ...