Political debate is a necessary component of democracy and an effective tool for resolving disputes between dissenting parties. However, today’s political climate can be bleak in part because of the heightened levels of polarization between citizens and the fact that political debates often appear adversarial and unproductive.
Several interventions could help to improve debates, but a crucial first step is to adjust public perceptions about the way that they occur in real life. Our research shows that people dramatically overestimate how many online debates they engage in and that this misperception is related to feelings of hopelessness about America’s future.
Our research also suggests that if people expect to be held accountable for their claims they will be more careful about making sure they are grounded in sound reasoning and will be more willing to listen to arguments from other sides of an issue. This would help to reduce the occurrence of falsehoods and smears in political discourse.
One additional finding is that it is very difficult to change someone’s whole political ideology in a single conversation. A better approach is to disentangle an individual belief about a specific policy or issue from their overall worldview and then show how the facts can still be accommodated into their beliefs — for example, showing that free-market capitalism supports economic growth or explaining that denial of global warming is based on flawed science.
Finally, our research suggests that the standard debate format should be changed to allow for more direct interaction between the leaders and more time for each leader to clarify a previous response or respond to attacks. These changes, along with other reforms suggested by the Working Group, would make the debate process more productive for voters and help to re-invigorate interest in politics.
About the Author
