TV 정치광고에 대한 Stand by Your Ad(SBYA) 법안의 실효성 연구 노출 순서에 따른 유권자 반응을 중심으로 = How Voters Response to the Position of "Stand by Your Ad" Legislation -on TV Political Advertising

국문 초록 (Abstract)

본 연구는 긍정적이고 건전한 선거풍토 조성과 함께 부정적 정치광고의 사용을 지양하고자 하는 목적으로 현재 미국에서 제정, 시행되고 있는 정치광고 정책인 "Stand by Your Ad"(SBYA) 법안의 노출 순서에 따른 유권자들의 반응을 알아보기 위해 2("Stand by Your Ad" 문안의 노출 순서: 광고의 시작, 광고의 끝) x 2(메시지 유형: 긍정적, 부정적) x 2(노출수준: 낮다, 높다) 형식의 피험자 간 요인실험설계를 실시했다. 연구 결과 광고를 사용한 후보자에 대한 유권자의 지지의사 측면에서 "Stand by Your Ad" 문안이 광고의 시작 부분에 삽입되고 노출수준이 높을 경우 긍정적 정치광고는 긍정적 반응이 증가하는 반면 부정적 정치광고는 부정적 반응이 증가했다. 이와 반대로 SBYA 문안이 광고의 마지막 부분에 삽입되어 반복 노출될 경우 긍정적 정치광고는 부정적 반응이 증가하는 반면, 부정적 정치광고는 긍정적 반응이 증가했다. 결론적으로 "Stand by Your Ad" 문안이 부정적 정치광고를 줄이기 위한 목적인만큼 부정적 정치광고에 대한 유권자들의 긍정적 반응을 감소시키기 위해 광고의 앞부분에 "Stand by Your Ad" 문안을 삽입하도록 하는 것이 바람직하다고 하겠다.

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

This paper examines the effectiveness of "stand by your ad" regulation in terms of the position of SBYA disclosure, message valence, and message repetition. The study explored the impact of the position of SBYA on voting intention for the sponsor, and MANCOVA revealed a significant three-way interaction. As a message repeated, positive political advertising with SBYA disclosure on the beginning increased voting intention to the sponsoring candidate, whereas negative political advertising with SBYA legislation on the beginning decreased voting intention to the ad sponsor. On the other hand, at high level of frequency, positive political ad with SBYA on the end diminished voting intention to the sponsor, while negative political ad with SBYA on the end enhanced its effectiveness.

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 송종길, "정치관여도 미디어 , 중요성, 정치냉소주의와정치효능감이 정치결정과정에 미치는 영향에 관한 연구" 한국방송학회 20 (20): 166-197, 2006

2 김하나, "미국의 부정적 정치광고 정책이 정치광고 효과에 미치는 영향 “Stand by Your Ad” 법안을 중심으로" 한국광고홍보학회 85 (85): 78-102, 2010

3 윤각, "공격적 정치광고가 투표의향과 정치 냉소주의 형성에 미치는 영향: 유권자의 정치 관여도와 정보원 공신력의 역할을 중심으로" 11 (11): 113-130, 2000

4 Batra, R., "situational Effects of Advertising Repetition: The Moderating Influence of Motivation, Ability, and Oppottunity to Respond" 12 : 432-445, 1986

5 Baker, W. E., "When Can Affective Conditioning and Mere Exposure Directly Influence Brand Choice?" 28 (28): 31-46, 1999

6 Papageorgis, D., "Warning and Persuasion" 70 : 271-282, 1968

7 ABC Lateline, "US Election Attack Ads Backfire"

8 Factcheck.org, "The Whoppers of 2006: We Review the Worst Deceptions from House and Senate Campaigns"

9 Lariscy, R. W., "The Sleeper Effect and Negative Political Advertising" 28 (28): 18-30, 1999

10 Eagly, A. H., "The Psychology of Attitudes" Harcourt Brace Jovanovich 1993

11 Sternthal, B., "The Persuasive Effect of Source Credibility: Tests of Cognitive Response" 4 : 252-260, 1978

12 Kellermann, K, "The Negative Effect and its Implications for Initial Interaction" 51 : 37-55, 1984

13 Newsweek, "The Limits of Negativity"

14 Middleton, K. R., "The Law of Public Communication" Pearson Education,Inc 2005

15 Greenberg,B., "The Effects of Bylines on Attitude Change" 38 : 535-537, 1961

16 김하나, "TV 정치광고의 반복노출효과 : 미국 대학생들을 중심으로" 한국지역언론학회 10 (10): 260-300, 2010

17 Bornstein, R. F., "Stimulus Recognition and the Mere Exposure Effect" 63 : 545-552, 1992

18 CFIF.ORG, "Stand by Your Ad...Back from the Dead. CFIF.ORG.State Issues"

19 Dholakia, P. R., "Source Credibility Effects: A Test of Behavioral Persistence" Association of Consumer Research 14 : 426-430, 1986

20 Price, D., "Shays-Meehan Bill Contains Price's Stand by Your Ad Proposal"

21 North Carolina General Assembly, "Session Law 1999-453, Senate Bill#881. An Act ToEstablish the Campaign Reform Act of 1999"

22 Thorson, E., "Selling Candidates like Tubes of Toothpaste: Is the Comparison Apt?" 1 : 148-149, 1991

23 Kim, H., "Repetition Effect of Positive and Negative Political Advertising: Recall, Attitude and Voting Intention" 2005

24 Kim, H., "Public Policies and Political Advertising: What Do Source Disclosure, Message Valence and Repetition Achieve?" 2007

25 Janiszewski, C., "Preattentive Mere Exposure Effects" 20 (20): 376-392, 1993

26 CNN News, "Political Television Advertising to Reach $3 Billion"

27 Patterson, T. E., "Political Advertising: Voter Reactin to Televisied Political Commericals" Citizen's Research Foundation 1974

28 Husek, T. R., "Persuasive Impacts on Early, Late, or No Mention of a Negative Source" 2 : 125-128, 1965

29 Ward, C., "Persuasive Effects of Early and Late Mention of Credible and Noncredible Source" 86 : 17-23, 1974

30 Mills,J., "Opinion Change as a Function of When Information about the Communicators is Received and Whether He Is Attractive or Expert" 21 : 52-55, 1972

31 McConnell,M., "Opening Statement-Hearings on Compelled Political Speech"

32 Cusumano, D., "Negative Salience in Impression of Character: Effects of Extremeness of Salient Information" 20 : 81-83, 1970

33 Johnson-Cartee, K.S., "Negative Political Advertising: Coming of Age" Lawrence Erlbaum Associates 1991

34 CBS Evenign News, "Nasty Campaign Ad Spending Beats Nice, 10:1;2006 Ratio Radically Higher than 2004 When Positive, Negative Ad Dollars Nearly Equal"

35 New York Times, "Midtern Meanness: Negative Ads Rule the 2006 Elections"

36 Tom, G., "Mere Exposure and the Endowment Effect on Consumer Decision Marking" 141 (141): 117-125, 2007

37 Aliance for Better Campaigns, "Issue Brief: Stand by Your Ad"

38 Grush,J.E., "Impact of Candidate Expenditures, Rationality, and prior Outcomes on the 1976 Democratic Presidential Primaries" 38 (38): 337-347, 1980

39 Patterson, K., "I Approved this Message" 26 (26): 39-40, 2004

40 DeVore, P. C., "Fruit Growers' Generic Advertising Program Not Compelled Speech, Supreme Court Rules"

41 Schaffner, P.E., "Familiarity Breeds Success: A Field Study of Exposure and Voting Behavior" 1 : 81-83, 1974

42 Grush,J.E., "Extrapolating Laboratort Exposure Research to Actual Political Elections" 36 (36): 257-270, 1978

43 Tinkham, S. F., "Ethical Judgments of Political Television Commercials as predictors of Attitide toward the ad" 23 (23): 43-57, 1994

44 Gale, k., "Election:Effects of rhe Stand by Your Ad Provision on Attitudes About Candidates and Campaigns" 35 (35): 771-783, 2005

45 McGuire, W.J., "Effectiveness of Forewarning in Developing Resistance to Persuasion" 42 : 71-80, 1962

46 Atkin, C. K., "Effect of Political Advertising" 40 (40): 216-228, 1976

47 Zaller,J. R., "Diffusion of Political Attitudes" 53 (53): 821-833, 1987

48 "Cleaning Up" 9 (9): 1999

49 Bierley, C., "Classical Conditioning of Preferences for Stimuli" 12 (12): 316-323, 1985

50 Schaffner, P. E., "Candidate Name Expousure and Voting:Two field studies" 2 (2): 195-203, 1981

51 Papageorgis, D., "Anticipation of Exposure to Persuasive Message and Belief Change" 5 : 490-496, 1967

52 Tinkham, S. F., "Advertising Message strategy in US Congressional Campaigns: Its Impact on Election Outcome" 13 (13): 207-226, 1991

53 Rein, L., ""stand by Your Ad" Bill Advances in VA:Measure Expected to Go to Warner"