Librería Portfolio

The Sourcebook for Political Communication Research will offer scholars, students, researchers, and other interested readers a comprehensive source for state-of-the-art/field research methods, measures, and analytical techniques in the field of political communication.

The need for this Sourcebook stems from recent innovations in political communication involving the use of advanced statistical techniques, innovative conceptual frameworks, the rise of digital media as both a means by which to disseminate and study political communication, and methods recently adapted from other disciplines, particularly psychology, sociology, and neuroscience. Chapters will have a social-scientific orientation and will explain new methodologies and measures applicable to questions regarding media, politics, and civic life. The Sourcebook covers the major analytical techniques used in political communication research, including surveys (both original data collections and secondary analyses), experiments, content analysis, discourse analysis (focus groups and textual analysis), network and deliberation analysis, comparative study designs, statistical analysis, and measurement issues.



Table of Contents
Advancing Methods and Measurement: Supporting Theory and Keeping Pace with the Modern Political Environment

R. Lance Holbert, The Ohio State University

Erik P. Bucy, Indiana University

Part 1: Survey Methodology

Challenges and Opportunities of Panel Designs

William P. Eveland, Jr., The Ohio State University

Alyssa C. Morey, The Ohio State University

The Rolling Cross-Section: Design and Utility for Political Research

Kate Kenski, University of Arizona

Jeffrey A. Gottfried, University of Pennsylvania

Kathleen Hall Jamieson, University of Pennsylvania

Political Communication Survey Research: Challenges, Trends, Opportunities

Lindsay H. Hoffman, University of Delaware

Dannagal Goldthwaite Young, University of Delaware

Part II: Secondary Analysis and Meta Analysis

Secondary Analysis In Political Communication Viewed as Creative Act

R. Lance Holbert, The Ohio State University

Jay Hmielowski, The Ohio State University

Comparing the ANES and NAES for Political Communication Research

Michael W. Wagner, University of Nebraska-Lincoln

The Implications and Consequences of Using Meta-Analysis for Political Communication

Mike Allen, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee

David D'Alessio, University of Connecticut

Nancy Burrell, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee

Part III: Experimental Methods

Experimental Designs for Political Communication Research: Using New Technology and Online Participant Pools to Overcome the Problem of Generalizability

Shanto Iyengar, Stanford University

Expressing versus Revealing Preferences in Experimental Research

Yanna Krupnikov, Indiana University

Adam Seth Levine, University of Michigan

The Face as a Focus of Political Communication: Evolutionary Perspectives, Experimental Methods, and the Ethological Approach

Patrick A. Stewart, University of Arkansas

Frank K. Salter, Max Planck Society, Andechs, Germany

Marc Mehu, University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland

Multi-Stage Experimental Designs in Political Communication Research

Glenn J. Hansen, University of Oklahoma

Michael Pfau, University of Oklahoma

Part IV: Content Analysis

Image Bite Analysis of Political Visuals

Maria Elizabeth Grabe, Indiana University

Erik P. Bucy, Indiana University

Identifying Frames in Political News

Dennis Chong, Northwestern University

James N. Druckman, Northwestern University

Content Analysis in Political Communication

William L. Benoit, Ohio University

Part V: Discourse Analysis

The Uses of Focus Groups in Political Communication Research

Sharon E. Jarvis, University of Texas-Austin

Genealogy of Myth in Presidential Rhetoric

Robert L. Ivie, Indiana University

Oscar Giner, Arizona State University

Part VI: Network and Deliberation Analysis

Methods for Analyzing and Measuring Group Deliberation

Laura W. Black, Ohio University

Stephanie Burkhalter, Humboldt State University

John Gastil, University of Washington

Jennifer Stromer-Galley, University of Albany, SUNY

Porous Networks and Overlapping Contexts: Methodological Challenges in the Study of Social Communication and Political Behavior

Scott D. McClurg, Southern Illinois University

Comparative Political Communication

Mediatization of Politics: Toward a Conceptual Framework for Comparative Research

Jesper Stromback, Mid Sweden University, Sundsvall, Sweden

International Applications of the Agenda-Setting Acapulco Typology

Maxwell E. McCombs, University of Texas-Austin

Salma Ghanem, University of Texas-Pan American

Federico Rey Lennon, Catholic University, Argentina

R. Warwick Blood, University of Canberra, Australia

Katherine Chen, National Chengchi University, Taiwan

Political Communication Across the World: Methodological Issues Involved in International Comparisons

Christina Holtz-Bacha, University of Erlangen-Nürnberg, Germany

Lynda Lee Kaid, University of Florida

Part VII: Statistical Techniques

Expanding the Use of Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) in Political Communication

R. Lance Holbert, The Ohio State University

Heather L. LaMarre, University of Minnesota

Mediation and the Estimation of Indirect Effects in Political Communication Research

Andrew F. Hayes, The Ohio State University

Kristopher J. Preacher, University of Kansas

Teresa A. Myers, The Ohio State University

Time-Series Analysis and the Study of Political Communication

Jennifer Jerit, Florida State University

Adam F. Simon, Yale University

Part VIII: Measurement

Concept Explication in the Internet Age: The Case of Interactivity

S. Shyam Sundar, The Pennsylvania State University

Saraswathi Bellur, The Pennsylvania State University

Beyond Self-Report: Using Latency Measures to Model the Question Answering Process on Web-Based Public Opinion Surveys

John E. Newhagen, University of Maryland

What the Body Can Tell Us About Politics: The Use of Psychophysiological Measures in Political Communication Research

Erik P. Bucy, Indiana University

Samuel D. Bradley, Texas Tech University

Part IX: Conclusion

Looking Back and Looking Forward: Observations on a Rapidly Evolving Field

Gerald Kosicki, The Ohio State University

Doug M. McLeod, University of Wisconsin-Madison

Jack M. McLeod, University of Wisconsin-Madison