Betsi Grabe, associate professors of telecommunications

You've heard of sound bites, but what about image bites, news images in which political candidates are seen but not heard? According to a recently published study by two Indiana University professors, images are a vastly underappreciated influence on voter impressions of presidential candidates.

Erik Bucy and Betsi Grabe, both associate professors of telecommunications at IU Bloomington, recently published "Taking Television Seriously: A Sound and Image Bite Analysis of Presidential Campaign Coverage, 1992-2004" in the Journal of Communication. The study is taken from a larger research project to be published as the book Image Bite Politics: News and the Visual Framing of Elections by Oxford University Press in 2009.

In the study, Bucy and Grabe found that political candidates appear in image bites significantly more often than they are heard in sound bites. Between 1992 and 2004, candidates were steadily shown more in individual stories on the evening news, while their verbal statements, or sound bites, decreased in average length.

Despite the decrease in average sound bite lengths, though, voters gathered considerable information to use in evaluating candidates through the increase in image-bite time.

Erik Bucy, associate professors of telecommunications

"Images are discounted in research because they seem so intuitively obvious," Bucy says. "The truth is, many voters base their choices on what they see rather than what they hear."

Bucy and Grabe examined 62 hours of broadcast network news coverage -- a total of 178 newscasts over the last four U.S. presidential elections. They found that sound bites steadily decreased from 9.19 seconds in 1992 to 7.73 seconds in 2004. During the same period, the total duration of image bites increased from 22.9 seconds per election story in 1992 to 25.8 in 2004. The increase in visual airtime has given campaigns and consultants more opportunity to shape candidate images.

Since Dwight D. Eisenhower's campaigns in the 1950s, presidential candidates have assigned considerable importance to managing their images. Today, Grabe and Bucy argue, fitting candidates into images that will play well with voters has become as important as articulating policy positions.

"In presidential races where candidates don't differ much on issues, as in the current Democratic Party primaries, perceptions of candidate character become a key point in voter decision-making," Grabe says. "Television provides a fishbowl view of politicians as they blaze the campaign trail. If we see them acting awkwardly or unleader-like, we notice that, at least as much as we notice verbal blunders.

"We are biologically designed to be superb visual processors," Grabe continues. "Visual displays of either awkwardness or strong leadership qualities do not go unnoticed."

In fact, seeing is remembering, the co-authors say. Close-ups and action shots that offer clues about status and physical and mental fitness make for persuasive messages. Applying their research to this year's election, Grabe points to the so-called "charisma factor" surrounding Sen. Barack Obama's campaign and says comparisons to John Kennedy are not coincidental.

"[The] 'Camelot frame' surfaced visually long before the Kennedy endorsements. Obama's image handlers encouraged his statesman qualities," she explains. "Obama stays above the fray, his rallies are designed for visual pomp and ceremony, and he dresses like a statesman. Not too flashy, never casual, always immaculately understated.

"He also wears the populism frame," Grabe says, "but, interestingly, in rhetoric only. He verbally expresses concern for regular folks, but visually he shows up as a statesman. That puts Teflon between him and questions about his experience to lead."

Researchers have been misguided in overlooking the dramatic effect of visuals in political communication, Bucy says. "Candidates may be heard less, but they are seen more than ever before -- and that shapes voter decisions. Visual portrayals provide an accurate indication of a candidate's electoral suitability and are politically consequential."

For more on Bucy's work, see http://www.indiana.edu/~telecom/faculty/bucy.html. For more on Grabe's work, see http://www.indiana.edu/~telecom/faculty/grabe.html.