{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.03338391502276176, 'fraction_numerical': 0.013657056145675266, 'mean_word_length': 6.287292817679558, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Food for Thought: A Longitudinal Investigation of Reflection-Promoting Speech in Televised Election Debates (1985–2019)

In televised election debates, politicians confront each other side-by-side to publicly debate their political viewpoints. As a result, these debates have the potential to promote reflective reasoning in citizens. However, concerns are voiced regularly about politicians’ increasing use of one-liners, slogans, and empty phrases, and decreasing use of elaborate and thoughtful argumentation, which may lower the debates’ reflection-promoting potential. Despite concerns, systematic empirical evidence testing whether reflection-promoting speech is declining is extremely scarce. This study contributes to filling this gap by (1) identifying four reflection-promoting speech components, that is, provision of justifications, substantive information, accessible communication, and engagement with others’ perspectives and (2) conducting a longitudinal quantitative content analysis (1985–2019) of Belgian election debates through the lens of their reflection-promoting potential. The results of all studied speech components point in the same direction: reflection-promoting speech in election debates has not declined, showing that allegations surrounding debates should be considered with caution.