A influência da mídia em resultados eleitorais
uma revisão sistemática
Palavras-chave:
Mídias, Resultados eleitorais, Influência, Informação, EleiçõesResumo
Em sociedades democráticas com mídias livres em que os meios de comunicação exercem papel crucial na divulgação de informações, torna-se importante investigar se a mídias afetam resultados eleitorais. Assim, o artigo investiga a literatura acadêmica produzida em língua inglesa sobre os efeitos das mídias em resultados eleitorais para o período de 1996 a 2017 por meio de condução de uma revisão sistemática (RS). Os resultados apontam significativa influência das mídias, com 91% dos estudos atestando o fenômeno e respondendo por 97,5% das citações do Google Scholar sobre o tema no mesmo período, entretanto os tipos de notícia vinculados aos candidatos e a forma como a mídia os cobre também importam para os resultados eleitorais. Além disso, as mídias convencionais (televisão, jornal e rádio) aparecem com papel dominante na capacidade de influenciar e em número de estudos realizados. As novas mídias (Twitter, Facebook, blogs, sites), porém, começaram a ser estudadas somente de 2013 em diante, mas a partir de 2015 já são a maioria nas pesquisas desenvolvidas.
Downloads
Referências
ABNEY, R. et al. When does valence matter? Heightened valence effects for governing parties during election campaigns. Party Politics, v. 19, n. 1, p. 61-82, 2010. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F1354068810395057
ATKESON, L.; KREBS, T. Press coverage of mayoral candidates: The role of gender in news reporting and campaign issue speech. Political Research Quarterly, v. 61, n. 2, p. 239-252, 2008.
BAEK, M. A comparative analysis of political communication systems and voter turnout. American Journal of Political Science, v. 53, n. 2, p. 376-393, 2009. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5907.2009.00376.x
BANDUCCI, S.; KARP, J. How elections change the way citizens view the political system: Campaigns, media effects and electoral outcomes in comparative perspective. British Journal of Political Science, v. 33, n. 3, p. 443-467, 2003. https://doi.org/10.1017/S000712340300019X
BARCLAY, F. P. et al. India 2014: facebook “like” as a predictor of election outcomes. Asian Journal of Political Science, v. 23, n. 2, p. 134-160, 2015. https://doi.org/10.1080/02185377.2015.1020319
BARONE, G.; D’ACUNTO, F.; NARCISO, G. Telecracy: Testing for channels of persuasion. American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, v. 7, n. 2, p. 30-60, 2015. http://dx.doi.org/10.1257/pol.20130318
BIOLCHINI, J. et al. Systematic Review in Software Engineering. Technical Report ES67905. Rio de Janeiro: PESC / COPPE / UFRJ, 2005. Disponível em: <https://www.cos.ufrj.br/uploadfile/es67905.pdf>. Acesso em: 2 out. 2017.
BOAS, T. C.; HIDALGO, F. D. Controlling the Airwaves: Incumbency Advantage and Community Radio in Brazil. American Journal of Political Science, v. 55, n. 4, p. 869-885, 2011. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5907.2011.00532.x
BOX-STEFFENSMEIER, J. M.; DARMOFAL, D.; FARRELL, C. A. The Aggregate Dynamics of Campaigns. The Journal of Politics, v. 71, n. 1, p. 309-323, 2009. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0022381608090208
BRUNS, C.; HIMMLER, O. Media activity and public spending. Economics of Governance, v. 11, n. 4, p. 309- 332, 2010. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10101-010-0083-x
CHAN, J.; STONE, D. Media proliferation and partisan selective exposure. Public Choice, v. 156, n. 3-4, p. 467- 490, 2013. https://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1601604
CHIANG, C.-F.; KNIGHT, B. Media Bias and Influence: Evidence from Newspaper Endorsements. The Review of Economic Studies, v. 78, n. 3, p. 795-820, 2011. https://dx.doi.org/10.3386/w14445
COWLEY, P. The Observer: Good at Observing, Less Good at Influencing? Political Studies, v. 49, n. 5, p. 957-968, 2001. https://doi.org/10.1111%2F1467-9248.00349
DAMORE, D. F.; HANSFORD, T. G.; BARGHOTHI, A. J. Explaining the decision to withdraw from a US presidential nomination campaign. Political Behavior, v. 32, n. 2, p. 157-180, 2010. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11109-009-9098-9
DA SILVEIRA, B. S.; DE MELLO, J. M. Campaign advertising and election outcomes: Quasi-natural experiment evidence from gubernatorial elections in Brazil. The Review of Economic Studies, v. 78, n. 2, p. 590-612, 2011. https://doi.org/10.1093/restud/rdq012
DELLAVIGNA, S.; KAPLAN, E. The Fox News effect: Media bias and voting. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, v. 122, n. 3, p. 1187-1234, 2007. https://doi.org/10.3386/w12169
DUNNING, T. Natural Experiments in the Social Sciences: A Design-Based Approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012.
EPSTEIN, R.; ROBERTSON, R. E. The search engine manipulation effect (SEME) and its possible impact on the outcomes of elections. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, v. 112, n. 33, p. E4512-E4521,
https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1419828112
ERIKSON, R. S.; WLEZIEN, C. Presidential polls as a time series: the case of 1996. Public Opinion Quarterly, v. 63, n. 2, p. 163-177, 2001. https://doi.org/10.1086/297709
FAAS, T.; MACKENRODT, C.; SCHMITT-BECK, R. Polls that mattered: effects of media polls on voters’ coalition expectations and party preferences in the 2005 German parliamentary election. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, v. 20, n. 3, p. 299-325, 2008. https://doi.org/10.1093/ijpor/edn034
FERRAZ, C.; FINAN, F. Exposing corrupt politicians: the effects of Brazil’s publicly released audits on electoral outcomes. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, v. 123, n. 2, p. 703-745, 2008. https://doi.org/10.1162/ qjec.2008.123.2.703
FINKEL, S. E.; GEER, J. G. A spot check: Casting doubt on the demobilizing effect of attack advertising. American Journal of Political Science, v. 42, n. 2, p. 573-595, 1998. https://doi.org/10.2307/2991771
FOWLER, L. L.; LAWLESS, J. L. Looking for sex in all the wrong places: Press coverage and the electoral fortunes of gubernatorial candidates. Perspectives on Politics, v. 7, n. 3, p. 519-536, 2009. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1537592709990843
GELMAN, A.; KING, G. Why are American presidential election campaign polls so variable when votes are so predictable? British Journal of Political Science, v. 23, n. 4, p. 409-451, 1993.
GERBER, A. S. et al. How large and long-lasting are the persuasive effects of televised campaign ads? Results from a randomized field experiment. American Political Science Review, v. 105, n. 1, p. 135-150, 2011.
GERBER, A. S.; KARLAN, D.; BERGAN, D. Does the media matter? A field experiment measuring the effect of newspapers on voting behavior and political opinions. American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, v. 1, n. 2, p. 35-52, 2009.
GOLDSTEIN, K.; FREEDMAN, P. New evidence for new arguments: Money and advertising in the 1996 Senate elections. The Journal of Politics, v. 62, n. 4, p. 1087-1108, 2000. https://doi.org/10.1111/0022-3816.00047
GONG, R. Internet politics and state media control: Candidate weblogs in Malaysia. Sociological Perspectives, v. 54, n. 3, p. 307-328, 2011. https://doi.org/10.1525%2Fsop.2011.54.3.307
GREENE, K. F. Campaign persuasion and nascent partisanship in Mexico’s new democracy. American Journal of Political Science, v. 55, n. 2, p. 398-416, 2011. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5907.2010.00497.x
HALL, A. B.; SNYDER, J. M. Information and Wasted Votes: A Study of US Primary Elections. 2015. https://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2641884
HAYES, D. Has television personalized voting behavior? Political Behavior, v. 31, n. 2, p. 231-260, 2009. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11109-008-9070-0
HOLBERT, R. L. Intramedia mediation: The cumulative and complementary effects of news media use. Political Communication, v. 22, n. 4, p. 447-461, 2005. https://doi.org/10.1080/10584600500311378
HOLLANDER, B. A. The surprised loser: the role of electoral expectations and news media exposure in satisfaction with democracy. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, v. 91, n. 4, p. 651-668, 2014. https://doi. org/10.1177%2F1077699014543380
HUBER, G. A.; ARCENEAUX, K. Identifying the persuasive effects of presidential advertising. American Journal of Political Science, v. 51, n. 4, p. 957-977, 2007. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5907.2007.00291.x
KAYSER, M. A.; PERESS, M. Benchmarking across borders: electoral accountability and the necessity of comparison. American Political Science Review, v. 106, n. 3, p. 661-684, 2012. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003055412000275
KENNY, C.; MCBURNETT, M. Up close and personal: Campaign contact and candidate spending in US house elections. Political Research Quarterly, v. 50, n. 1, p. 75-96, 1997. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/106591299705000104
KITCHENHAM, B. Procedures for performing systematic reviews Technical Report TR/SE0401. Keele: Keele University and NICTA, 2004.
KLEINNIJENHUIS, J.; DE RIDDER, J. A. Issue news and electoral volatility. A comparative analysis of media effects during the 1994 election campaigns in Germany and the Netherlands. European Journal of Political Research, v. 33, n. 3, p. 413-437, 1998. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1006861405009
KLEINNIJENHUIS, J. et al. Issues and personalities in German and Dutch television news: Patterns and effects. European Journal of Communication, v. 16, n. 3, p. 337-359, 2001. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0267323101016003003
LARREGUY, H. A.; MARSHALL, J.; SNYDER JR., J. M. Leveling the playing field: How campaign advertising can help non-dominant parties (No. w22949). National Bureau of Economic Research, 2016.
LARREGUY, H. A.; MARSHALL, J.; SNYDER JR., J. M. Revealing malfeasance: How local media facilitates electoral sanctioning of mayors in Mexico (No. w20697). National Bureau of Economic Research, 2014. https:// doi.org/10.3386/w20697
LAZARSFELD, P. F.; BERELSON, B.; GAUDET, H. The people’s choice: how the voter makes up his mind in a presidential election. 2. ed. Nova York: Columbia University Press, 1948.
LEON, F. L. L. The Tuesday advantage of politicians endorsed by American newspapers. The BE Journal of Economic Analysis and Policy, v. 13, n. 2, p. 865-886, 2013. https://doi.org/10.1515/bejeap-2012-0043
LENZ, G. S.; LAWSON, C. Looking the part: Television leads less informed citizens to vote based on candidates’ appearance. American Journal of Political Science, v. 55, n. 3, p. 574-589, 2011. https://doi.org/10.1111/ j.1540-5907.2011.00511.x
LEVY, D.; SQUIRE, P. Television markets and the competitiveness of US House elections. Legislative Studies Quarterly, v. 25, n. 2, p. 313-325, 2000. https://doi.org/10.2307/440373
LIN, J. H. Differential gains in SNSs: effects of active vs. passive Facebook political participation on offline political participation and voting behavior among first-time and experienced voters. Asian Journal of Communication, v. 26, n. 3, p. 278-297, 2016. https://doi.org/10.1080/01292986.2016.1148184
MADDENS, B. et al. Effects of campaign spending in an open list PR system: The 2003 legislative elections in Flanders/ Belgium. West European Politics, v. 29, n. 1, p. 161-168, 2006. https://doi.org/10.1080/01402380500389398
MALDONADO, M.; SIERRA, V. Twitter Predicting the 2012 US Presidential Election?: Lessons Learned from an Unconscious Value Co-Creation Platform. Journal of Organizational and End User Computing, v. 28, n. 3, p. 10-30, 2016. https://doi.org/10.4018/JOEUC.2016070102
MCGREGOR, S. C.; MOURÃO, R. R.; MOLYNEUX, L. Twitter as a tool for and object of political and electoral activity: Considering electoral context and variance among actors. Journal of Information Technology and Politics, v. 14, n. 2, p. 154-167, 2017. https://doi.org/10.1080/19331681.2017.1308289
MENDELSOHN, M. The media and interpersonal communications: The priming of issues, leaders, and party identification. The Journal of Politics, v. 58, n. 1, p. 112-125, 1996. https://doi.org/10.2307/2960351
MIGUEL, Luis Felipe. Mídia e vínculo eleitoral: a literatura internacional e o caso brasileiro. Opinião Pública, v. 10, n. 1, p. 91-111, 2004. https://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0104-62762004000100004
MUIS, J. Simulating political stability and change in the Netherlands (1998-2002): an agent-based model of party competition with media effects empirically tested. Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, v. 13, n. 2, p. 4, 2010. https://doi.org/10.18564/jasss.1482
MUTZ, D. C. The great divide: Campaign media in the American mind. Daedalus, v. 141, n. 4, p. 83-97, 2012. https://doi.org/10.1162/DAED_a_00175
NEO, R. L. Favoritism or Animosity? Examining How SNS Network Homogeneity Influences Vote Choice via Affective Mechanisms. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, v. 28, n. 4, p. 461-483, 2016. https://doi.org/10.1093/ijpor/edv035
ORTEGA, J. L.; AGUILLO, I. F. Mapping world-class universities on the web. Information Processing and Management, v. 45, n. 2, p. 272-279, 2009. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ipm.2008.10.001
PARKES, A.; MILTON, S. Online activity and electoral outcomes. Communication, Politics and Culture, v. 48, n. 1, p. 18-34, 2015.
REEVES, A.; MCKEE, M.; STUCKLER, D. “It’s The Sun Wot Won It”: Evidence of media influence on political attitudes and voting from a UK quasi-natural experiment. Social Science Research, v. 56, p. 44-57, 2016. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssresearch.2015.11.002
SAFIULLAH, M. et al. Social media as an upcoming tool for political marketing effectiveness. Asia Pacific Management Review, v. 22, n. 1, p. 10-15, 2017. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmrv.2016.10.007
SCHMITT-BECK, R. Mass media, the electorate, and the bandwagon. A study of communication effects on vote choice in Germany. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, v. 8, n. 3, p. 266-291, 1996. https:// doi.org/10.1093/ijpor/8.3.266
SHAH, D. V. et al. News coverage, economic cues, and the public’s presidential preferences, 1984-1996. The Journal of Politics, v. 61, n. 4, p. 914-943, 1999. https://doi.org/10.2307/2647548
SHAW, D. R.; ROBERTS, B. E. Campaign events, the media and the prospects of victory: the 1992 and 1996 US presidential elections. British Journal of Political Science, v. 30, n. 2, p. 259-289, 2000. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0007123400000120
SHEA, D. M. All scandal politics is local: Ethical lapses, the media, and congressional elections. Harvard International Journal of Press/Politics, v. 4, n. 2, p. 45-62, 1999. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F1081180X99004002005
SHEAFER, T. Detecting campaign effects in imbalanced campaigns: The Likud’s intraparty referendum over Sharon’s disengagement plan. Harvard International Journal of Press/Politics, v. 10, n. 2, p. 85-93, 2005. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F1081180X05276016
SHEN, F. An economic theory of political communication effects: How the economy conditions political learning. Communication Theory, v. 19, n. 4, p. 374-396, 2009.
SHEN, F. Staying Alive: The Impact of Media Momentum on Candidacy Attrition in the 1980—2004 Primaries. The International Journal of Press/Politics, v. 13, n. 4, p. 429-450, 2008. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F1940161208323550
SPIERINGS, N.; JACOBS, K. Getting personal? The impact of social media on preferential voting. Political Behavior, v. 36, n. 1, p. 215-234, 2014. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11109-013-9228-2
STRÖMBERG, D. Mass media competition, political competition, and public policy. The Review of Economic Studies, v. 71, n. 1, p. 265-284, 2004. https://doi.org/10.1111/0034-6527.00284
TINKHAM, S. F.; LARISCY, R. W.; AVERY, E. J. Political advertising and the older electorate. Journal of Advertising, v. 38, n. 2, p. 105-120, 2009. https://doi.org/10.2753/JOA0091-3367380207
TWORZECKI, H.; SEMETKO, H. A. Media uses and effects in new democracies: The case of Poland’s 2005 parliamentary and presidential elections. The International Journal of Press/Politics, v. 15, n. 2, p. 155-174, 2010. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F1940161209360698
VAN DER MEER, T. W.; HAKHVERDIAN, A.; AALDERING, L. Off the fence, onto the bandwagon? A large-scale survey experiment on effect of real-life poll outcomes on subsequent vote intentions. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, v. 28, n. 1, p. 46-72, 2016. https://doi.org/10.1093/ijpor/edu041
VAN ERKEL, P. F.; THIJSSEN, P. The first one wins: Distilling the primacy effect. Electoral Studies, v. 44, p. 245- 254, 2016. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.electstud.2016.09.002
VAN SPANJE, J.; DE VREESE, C. Europhile media and Eurosceptic voting: Effects of news media coverage on Eurosceptic voting in the 2009 European parliamentary elections. Political Communication, v. 31, n. 2, p. 325-354, 2014. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10584609.2013.828137#metrics-content
VEENSTRA, A. S.; HOSSAIN, M. D.; LYONS, B. A. Partisan media and discussion as enhancers of the belief gap. Mass Communication and Society, v. 17, n. 6, p. 874-897, 2014. https://doi.org/10.1080/15205436.2013.855791
WRING, D.; DEACON, D. Patterns of press partisanship in the 2010 general election. British Politics, v. 5, n. 4, p. 436-454, 2010. https://doi.org/10.1057/bp.2010.18
YANG, J.; KIM, Y. M. Equalization or normalization? Voter–candidate engagement on Twitter in the 2010 US midterm elections. Journal of Information Technology and Politics, v. 14, n. 3, p. 232-247, 2017. https://doi.org/10.1080/19331681.2017.1338174
ZALLER, J. R. The nature and origins of mass opinion. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992.
ZERBACK, T.; REINEMANN, C.; NIENIERZA, A. Who’s Hot and Who’s Not? Factors Influencing Public Perceptions of Current Party Popularity and Electoral Expectations. The International Journal of Press/ Politics, v. 20, n. 4, p. 458-477, 2015. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F1940161215596986
