Page 28 - Comparing Political Communication Theories, Cases, and Challenge

P1: kic
0521828317agg.xml CY425/Esser 0521828317 May 22, 2004 10:19

Barbara Pfetsch and Frank Esser

to signify the comparison across national political systems or societies.
We are deliberately not using the terms interculturally comparative or
intersystemically comparative.The pragmatic reason for this conven-
tion is that of all conceivable reference frames national political systems
are the most clear-cut (Kohn 1989; Chapter 17, this volume). If the
terms interculturally or intersystemically were used we would have to
define in every case what is meant by culture or system.Because the
overwhelming majority of studies in this volume is concerned with
comparisons between countries it seems justified to speak of compara-
tive research. As we understand it in this volume, comparative political
communication research refers to comparison between a minimum of
two political systems or cultures (or their subelements) with respect
to at least one object of investigation relevant to communication stud-
ies. Furthermore, correlations with explanatory variables are considered
on the microanalytical actors’ level; the meso-analytical organizational
and institutional level; and on the macroanalytical system or cultural
level.
Moreover, we assume that the specific structures, norms, and val-
ues in political systems shape the political communication roles and
behaviors. Therefore, comparative research is often designed in such a
way that the countries studied are selected with regard to the contextual
conditions of the object of research (Chapter 17, this volume). Thus,
the crucial questions to be answered are 1) What always applies regard-
less of the contextual influences? 2) How does the object of investigation
“behave”undertheinfluenceofdifferentcontextualconditions?Michael
Gurevitch and Jay Blumler (Chapter 14, this volume) rightly stress that
comparative research “should be designed to realize ‘double value.’ That
is, it should aim to shed light not only on the particular phenomena
being studied but also on the different systems in which they are being
examined. In other words, more mature comparative research will be
‘system sensitive.’” The way in which the context shapes the object of
investigation and, conversely, any repercussions on the system resulting
from the object of investigation, is of central importance in comparative
political communication.
Since the early days of comparative studies, enormous progress has
been made with respect to the refinement of research designs. In the
meantime, the more demanding studies are built on the logic of “quasi-
experimental methods.” Researchers select their cases or countries in
such a way that they correspond with the differing characteristics of the
independent, explanatory variables (e.g., suffrage in countries with the

8