Political debate is important for promoting greater understanding of complex issues, encouraging compromise, and shaping public policy. However, increased political polarization has led many Americans to view debate as unproductive. Some see it as a contest of winners and losers rather than a mutual effort to inform. This bleak outlook has even driven some candidates to avoid or limit the number of debates they participate in.
What are the reasons for this? One explanation is that the heightened competition and partisanship of modern times make it difficult to gain an electoral advantage by using the debate stage. Additionally, a single misstep during a debate can damage a candidate’s image. This is why some candidates shun debates, preferring to invest in paid media campaigns instead.
However, this is not the entire story. In fact, most of us engage in regular political debates on a daily basis with family members, friends, and coworkers. These in-person conversations can be more constructive than the contentious debates seen on television and social media platforms such as X and TikTok.
Our new research provides insight into how people perceive these debates and the factors that may enhance or diminish their quality. In two studies (studies 2a-2b), we surveyed participants and asked them to freely recall a recent political debate they observed online or in person and then describe the debate’s characteristics. We found that manipulating core debate elements (e.g., providing evidence-based counterarguments versus emotion-based ones and signaling openness to compromise) promotes high-quality debate.