Przejdź do głównego menu Przejdź do sekcji głównej Przejdź do stopki
Journals name baner

Nr 1(16) (2022)

Artykuły

Koncepcja issue ownership i jej (nie)obecność w polskim piśmiennictwie dotyczącym kampanii wyborczych

Opublikowane: 2022-06-30

Abstrakt

This article analyzes the origins of the concept of issue ownership as a paradigm of explaining electoral campaigns, that dominated the English-language literature on the subject. The presentation encompasses the emergence of the central concept of „issue ownership” and its variants, and an overview of the most important empirical theorems associated with them. The following part of the article presents the use of the logic of the discussed theory in Polish literature on electoral campaigns. While references to the paradigmatic publication of the author of the concept of issue ownership, John Petrocik (1996), are almost absent in Polish-language literature on the subject, the reasoning typical for this paradigm is used by many Polish researchers. The article presents examples of this type of analysis. The postulate of introducing this concept in a systematic manner to the research of political competition in Poland and to the academic teaching is put forward.

Bibliografia

  1. Adams James, Clark Michael, Ezrow Lawrence, Glasgow Garrett (2006), Are Niche Parties Fundamentally Different From Mainstream Parties? The Causes and the Electoral Consequences of Western European Parties’ Policy Shifts, 1976–1998, „American Journal of Political Science”, 503, s. 513–529, DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-5907.2006.00199.x. [Google Scholar]
  2. Aldrich John H., Griffin John D. (2003), The presidency and the campaign: creating voter priorities in the 2000 election, „The presidency and the political system, 7, s. 239–256. [Google Scholar]
  3. Ansolabehere Stephen, Iyengar Shanto (1994), Riding the Wave and Claiming Ownership over Issues: The Joint Effects of Advertising and News Coverage in Campaigns, „Public Opinion Quarterly”, 58 (3), s. 334–357. [Google Scholar]
  4. Bartnicki Sławomir, Alimowski Maciej (2022), W poszukiwaniu demograficznych efektów rządowego programu „Rodzina 500 Plus”, „Studia Socjologiczne”, nr 1 (244), s. 193–219, DOI: 10.24425/sts.2022.140601. [Google Scholar]
  5. Berelson Bernard R., Lazarsfeld Paul F., McPhee William N. (1954), Voting: A Study of Opinion Formation in a Presidential Campaign, Chicago: University of Chicago Press. [Google Scholar]
  6. Brug Wouter van der (2004), Issue ownership and party choice, „Electoral studies”, 23 (2), s. 209–233. [Google Scholar]
  7. Brug Wouter van der, Berkhout Joost (2015), The Effect of Associative Issue Ownership on Parties’ Presence in the News Media, „West European Politics, 38 (4), s. 869–887, DOI: 10.1080/01402382.2015.1039379. [Google Scholar]
  8. Budge Iam, Farlie Dennis J. (1983), Explaining and Predicting Elections: Issue Effects and Party Strategies in Twenty-three Democracies, London–Boston: Allen & Unwin. [Google Scholar]
  9. Campbell Angus, Converse Philip E., Miller Warren E., Stokes Donald E. (1960), The American Voter, Chicago: University of Chicago Press. [Google Scholar]
  10. Carmines Edward G., Gopoian J. David (1981), Issue coalitions, issueless campaigns: The paradox of rationality in American presidential elections, „The Journal of Politics”, 43 (4), s. 1170–1189. [Google Scholar]
  11. Cichosz Marzena (2007), Autokreacja wizerunku polityka na przykładzie wyborów prezydenckich w III RP, Toruń: Wydawnictwo Adam Marszałek. [Google Scholar]
  12. Cohen Bernard. C. (1963), Press and Foreign Policy, Princeton: Princeton University Press. [Google Scholar]
  13. Cwalina Wojciech, Falkowski Andrzej, Koniak Paweł, Mackiewicz Robert (2015), Wieloznaczność w przekazach politycznych, Gdańsk: Gdańskie Wydawnictwo Psychologiczne/GWP. [Google Scholar]
  14. Cwalina Wojciech, Koniak Paweł (2009), System przekonań politycznych obywatela jako podstawa jego decyzji wyborczych, w: Jolanta Miluska (red.), Polityka i politycy. Diagnozy – oceny – doświadczenia, Poznań: Wydawnictwo Naukowe UAM, s. 553–572. [Google Scholar]
  15. Damore David. F. (2004), The dynamics of issue ownership in presidential campaigns, „Political Research Quarterly”, 57 (3), s. 391–397. [Google Scholar]
  16. Downs Anthony (1957), An Economic Theory of Democracy, New York: Harper. [Google Scholar]
  17. Ezrow Lawrence (2008), Research Note: On the Inverse Relationship Between Votes and Proximity For Niche Parties, „European Journal of Political Research”, 472, s. 206–220, DOI: 10.1111/j.1475-6765.2007.00724.x. [Google Scholar]
  18. Farwell Lisa, Weiner Bernard (2000), Bleeding hearts and the heartless: Popular perceptions of liberal and conservative ideologies, „Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin”, 26 (7), s. 845–852. [Google Scholar]
  19. Gandy Jr Oscar H. (2017), Framing Inequality in Public Policy Discourse, w: Kate Kenski, Kathleen H. Jamieson, The Oxford Handbook of Political Communication, New York: Oxford University Press, s. 483–499, DOI: 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199793471.001.0001. [Google Scholar]
  20. Gorbaniuk Oleg (2010), The Impact of the Smolensk Air Crash on the Attribution of Personality Traits to Political Parties, „Current Problems Of Psychiatry”, 11 (2), s. 112–118. [Google Scholar]
  21. Gorbaniuk Oleg, Wilczewski Michał, Gorbaniuk Julia, Perec Karolina, Zielińska Marta, Piela Izabela (2020), Walidacja kwestionariusza do pomiaru percepcji partii politycznych w badaniach polskich wyborców, „Studia Socjologiczne”, 3 (238), s. 31–52, DOI: 10.24425/sts.2020.132469. [Google Scholar]
  22. Gorbaniuk Oleg., Wilczewski Michał, Ivanova Ana, Bevz Halyna, Gorbaniuk Julia (2021), The Measurement, Structure, and Cross-Cultural Equivalence of Political Party Perception. Evidence from Poland, Lithuania, and Ukraine, „Przegląd Wschodnioeuropejski”, 121, s. 209–224, DOI: 10.31648/pw.6471. [Google Scholar]
  23. Green-Pedersen Christopher, Mortensen Peter B. (2015), Avoidance and engagement: Issue competition in multiparty systems, „Political Studies”, 63 (4), s. 747–764. [Google Scholar]
  24. Greene Zachary (2016), Competing on the issues: How experience in government and economic conditions influence the scope of parties’ policy messages, „Party Politics”, 22 (6), s. 809–822. [Google Scholar]
  25. Haman Jacek (2003), Demokracja, decyzje, wybory, Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe Scholar. [Google Scholar]
  26. Hartliński Maciej (2012), Przywództwo polityczne. Wprowadzenie, Olsztyn: Instytut Nauk Politycznych Uniwersytetu Warmińsko-Mazurskiego w Olsztynie. [Google Scholar]
  27. Hayes Danny (2005), Candidate Qualities Through a Partisan Lens: A Theory of Trait Ownership, „American Journal of Political Science”, 49 (4), s. 908–923, DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-5907.2005.00163.x. [Google Scholar]
  28. Heck Sjoerd van (2018), Appealing broadly or narrowing down? The impact of government experience and party organization on the scope of parties’ issue agendas, „Party Politics”, 24 (4), s. 347–357. [Google Scholar]
  29. Hillygus D. Sunshine, Shields Todd (2008), The Persuadable Voter: Wedge Issues in Presidential Campaigns, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. [Google Scholar]
  30. Holian David B. (2004), He’s stealing my issues! Clinton’s crime rhetoric and the dynamics of issue ownership, „Political Behavior”, 26, s. 95–124, DOI:10.1023/B:POBE.0000035959.35567.16. [Google Scholar]
  31. Iyengar Shanto, Kinder Donald R. (1987), News that matters: Television and American Opinion, Chicago: University of Chicago Press. [Google Scholar]
  32. Kaplan Noah, Park David K., Ridout Travis N. (2006), Dialogue in American Political Campaigns? An Examination of Issue Convergence in Candidate Television Advertising, „American Journal of Political Science”, 50 (3), s. 724–736, DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-5907.2006.00212.x. [Google Scholar]
  33. Kaźmierczak-Kałużna Izabela (2020), Gdzie te dzieci? O pronatalistycznej (nie)efektywności programu „Rodzina 500 plus”. „Rocznik Lubuski”, 46 (2), s. 131–144, DOI: 10.34768/rl.2020.v462.09 [Google Scholar]
  34. Kern Montague (1989), 30-second Politics: Political advertising in the Eighties, New York: Praeger. [Google Scholar]
  35. Klingemann Hans-Dieter, Hofferbert Richard, Budge Ian (1994), Parties, Policies and Democracy, Boulder, CO: Westview. [Google Scholar]
  36. Kolczyński Marek (2008), Strategie komunikowania politycznego, Katowice: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Śląskiego. [Google Scholar]
  37. Krosnick Jon A., Brannon Laura A. (1993), The Impact of the Gulf War on the Ingredients of Presidential Evaluations: Multidimensional Effects of Political Involvement, „American Political Science Review”, 87 (4), s. 963–975, DOI: 10.2307/2938828. [Google Scholar]
  38. Krosnick Jon A., Kinder Donald (1990), Altering the Foundations of Support for the President through Priming, „American Political Science Review”, 84 (2), s. 497–512, doi :10.2307/1963531. [Google Scholar]
  39. Lanz Simon (2020), No Substitute for Competence: On the Origins and Consequences of Issue Ownership, London–New York: Rowman & Littlefield. [Google Scholar]
  40. Mayer William G. (1993), The Changing American Mind: How and Why American Public Opinion Changed Between 1960 and 1988, Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. [Google Scholar]
  41. Mazur Marek (2002), Marketing Polityczny. Studium porównawcze, Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN. [Google Scholar]
  42. Meguid Bonnie M. (2005), Competition Between Unequals: The Role of Mainstream Party Strategy in Niche Party Success, „American Political Science Review”, 99 (3), s. 347–359, doi:10.1017/S0003055405051701. [Google Scholar]
  43. Norpoth Helmut, Buchanan Bruce (1992), Wanted: The education president issue trespassing by political candidates, „Public Opinion Quarterly”, 56 (1), s. 87–99. [Google Scholar]
  44. Olszanecka-Marmola Agata (2020), Czy telewizyjna reklama polityczna może zmienić wizerunek kandydata?: Studium empiryczne wyborów prezydenckich 2015, Toruń: Wydawnictwo Adam Marszałek. [Google Scholar]
  45. Olszyk Sabina (2013), Stereotyp wroga w walce wyborczej w Polsce 1991–2011, Toruń: Dom Wydawniczy Duet. [Google Scholar]
  46. Page Benjamin I., Shapiro Robert Y. (1992), The Rational Public: Fifty Years of Trends in American Policy Preferences, Chicago: University of Chicago Press. [Google Scholar]
  47. Peszyński Wojciech, Tomczak Łukasz (2011), Wizerunek Sojuszu Lewicy Demokratycznej w Kampaniach wyborczych. Analiza marketingowa, w: Marek Migalski (red.), Sojusz Lewicy Demokratycznej, Toruń: Wydawnictwo Adam Marszałek, s. 233–267. [Google Scholar]
  48. Petrocik John. R. (1996), Issue Ownership in Presidential Elections, With A 1980 Case Study, „American Journal of Political Science”, 40 (3), s. 825–850. [Google Scholar]
  49. Petrocik John. R., Benoit William L., Hansen Glenn J. (2003/2004), Issue Ownership and Presidential Campaigning, 1952–2000, „Political Science Quarterly”, 118 (4), s. 599–626, DOI: 10.1002/j.1538-165X.2003.tb00407.x [Google Scholar]
  50. Pietraś Ziemowit J. (1998), Decydowanie polityczne, Warszawa–Kraków: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN. [Google Scholar]
  51. Pietrzyk-Zieniewicz Ewa (2000), Kreacja wizerunku przywódcy politycznego (style argumentacji), „Studia Politologiczne. Przywództwo Polityczne”, 5, s. 288–305. [Google Scholar]
  52. Piotrewicz Eliza, Małkowska Katarzyna (2009), Wizerunek polityczny kobiet-polityków w kampanii parlamentarnej w Polsce w 2007 roku, w: Joanna Marszałek-Kawa (red.), Kampanie wyborcze – studium przypadku, Toruń: Wydawnictwo Adam Marszałek, s. 23–41. [Google Scholar]
  53. Płudowski Tomasz (2016), Staying on message. Strategie komunikacyjne uczestniczek przedwyborczej debaty telewizyjnej „Rozmowa o Polsce”, w: Agnieszka Budzyńska-Daca (red.), 20 lat polskich telewizyjnych debat przedwyborczych, Warszawa: Wydział Polonistyki Uniwersytetu Warszawskiego, s. 241–274. [Google Scholar]
  54. Raciborski Jacek (1997), Polskie wybory. Zachowania wyborczej społeczeństwa polskiego w latach 1989–1995, Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe Scholar. [Google Scholar]
  55. Rafałowski Wojciech (2020), Parties’ Issue Emphasis Strategies on Facebook, „East European Politics and Societies and Cultures”, 34 (1), s. 96–123, DOI: 10.1177/0888325419859632. [Google Scholar]
  56. Rafałowski Wojciech (2021), Czy telewizyjna reklama polityczna może zmienić wizerunek kandydata? „Studia Polityczne”, 49 (3), s. 169–172, DOI: 10.35757/STP.2021.49.3.08. [Google Scholar]
  57. Rahn Wendy M. (1993), The role of partisan stereotypes in information processing about political candidates, „American Journal of Political Science”, 37 (2), s. 472–496. [Google Scholar]
  58. Riker William H. (1993), Political interaction in the ratification campaigns, w: William H. Riker (red.), Agenda Formation, Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press. [Google Scholar]
  59. Robertson David B. (1976), A Theory of Party Competition, London, UK: Wiley. [Google Scholar]
  60. Sears David. O., Huddy Leonie, Jervis Robert (2008), Psychologia polityczna, Kraków: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Jagiellońskiego. [Google Scholar]
  61. Sides John (2006), The origins of campaign agendas, „British Journal of Political Science”, 36 (3), s. 407–436. [Google Scholar]
  62. Sides John, Vavreck Lynn, Warshaw Christopher (2022), The Effect of Television Advertising in United States Elections, „American Political Science Review”, 116 (2), s. 702–718, doi:10.1017/S000305542100112X [Google Scholar]
  63. Smith Tom W. (1985a), The Polls: America’s Most Important Problems, Part I: National and International, „Public Opinion Quarterly”, 49, s. 264–274. [Google Scholar]
  64. Smith Tom W. (1985b), The Polls: America’s Most Important Problems, Part II: Regional, Community, and Personal, „Public Opinion Quarterly”, 49, s. 403–410. [Google Scholar]
  65. Spiliotes Constantine J., Vavreck Lynn (2002), Campaign Advertising: Partisan Convergence or Divergence? „The Journal of Politics”, 64 (1), s. 249–261, DOI: 10.1111/1468-2508.00127. [Google Scholar]
  66. Stubager Rune, Seeberg Henrik B. (2016), What Can a Party Say? How Parties’ Communication Can Influence Voters’ Issue Ownership Perceptions, „Electoral Studies”, 44 (C), s. 162–171, DOI: 10.1016/j.electstud.2016.08.013. [Google Scholar]
  67. Tavits Margit, Potter Joshua D. (2015), The Effect of Inequality and Social Identity on Party Strategies, „American Journal of Political Science”, 59 (3), s. 744–758, DOI: 10.1111/ajps.12144. [Google Scholar]
  68. Therriault Andrew (2015), Whose Issue Is It Anyway? A New Look at The Meaning and Measurement of Issue Ownership, „British Journal of Political Science”, 45 (4), s. 929–938, DOI: 10.1017/S000712341400057X. [Google Scholar]
  69. Tresch Anke, Lefevere Jonas, Walgrave Stefaan (2015), ‘Steal Me If You Can!’ The Impact Of Campaign Messages On Associative Issue Ownership, „Party Politics”, 21 (2), s. 198–208, DOI: 10.1177/1354068812472576. [Google Scholar]
  70. Trzeciak Sergiusz (2005), Kampania wyborcze. Strategia sukcesu, Poznań: Wydawnictwo Zysk i S-ka. [Google Scholar]
  71. Turska-Kawa Agnieszka (2015), Determinanty chwiejności wyborczej, Katowice: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Śląskiego. [Google Scholar]
  72. Wagner Markus (2011), Defining and Measuring Niche Parties, „Party Politics”, 18 (6), s. 845–864, DOI: 10.1177/1354068810393267. [Google Scholar]
  73. Wagner Markus, Meyer Thomas M. (2015), Negative Issue Ownership, „West European Politics”, 38 (4), s. 797–816, DOI: 10.1080/01402382.2015.1039380. [Google Scholar]
  74. Walgrave Stefaan, De Swert Knut (2007), Where Does Issue Ownership Come From? From the Party or From The Media? Issue-Party Identifications In Belgium, 1991–2005, „International Journal of Press/Politics”, 12 (1), s. 37–67, DOI: 10.1177/1081180X06297572. [Google Scholar]
  75. Walgrave Stefaan, Lefevere Jonas (2017), Long-Term Associative Issue Ownership Change: A Panel Study in Belgium, „Journal of Elections, Public Opinion and Parties”, 27 (4), s. 484–502, DOI: 10.1080/17457289.2017.1285305. [Google Scholar]
  76. Walgrave Stefaan, Lefevere Jonas, Tresch Anke (2012), The Associative Dimension of Issue Ownership, „Public Opinion Quartely”, 76 (4), s. 771–782, DOI: 10.1093/poq/nfs023. [Google Scholar]
  77. Warczok Tomasz, Zarycki Tomasz (2016), Gra peryferyjna. Polska politologia w globalnym polu nauk społecznych, Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe Scholar. [Google Scholar]
  78. Wilkos Sylwia (2001), Komunikacja w kampanii wyborczej, w: Sylwia Wilkos, Witold Ferens (red.), Kampania wyborcza. Strategia – taktyka – komunikacja, Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Sejmowe, s. 93–118. [Google Scholar]
  79. Żukiewicz Przemysław (2012), Przywództwo labilne. Mechanizm powrotu do władzy w świetle teorii przywództwa politycznego, Wrocław–Poznań: Centrum Analiz Systemów Politycznych. [Google Scholar]

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.