The DOI matches its Crossref record; 40 of the 40 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The Daily Show Effect: Candidate Evaluations, Efficacy, and American Youth
Abstract
We test the effects of a popular televised source of political humor for young Americans: The Daily Show With Jon Stewart. We find that participants exposed to jokes about George W. Bush and John Kerry on The Daily Show tended to rate both candidates more negatively, even when controlling for partisanship and other demographic variables. Moreover, we find that viewers exhibit more cynicism toward the electoral system and the news media at large. Despite these negative reactions, viewers of The Daily Show reported increased confidence in their ability to understand the complicated world of politics. Our findings are significant in the burgeoning field of research on the effects of “soft news” on the American public. Although research indicates that soft news contributes to democratic citizenship in America by reaching out to the inattentive public, our findings indicate that The Daily Show may have more detrimental effects, driving down support for political institutions and leaders among those already inclined toward nonparticipation.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Bowling alone: the collapse and revival of American community
(2000) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.38-2454 · Cited by 28,789
Putnam, R. (2000) · doi:10.1145/358916.361990 · Cited by 17,114
(1963) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 15,085
Review of personality and social psychology
Wheeler, L. S., & Shaver, P. R. (1980) · UMI Books on Demand · Cited by 3,593
Review of personality and social psychology
Davies, M. (1983) · Personality and Individual Differences · doi:10.1016/0191-8869(83)90072-7 · Cited by 3,365
Political Trust and Trustworthiness
Levi, M., & Stoker, L. (2000) · Annual Review of Political Science · doi:10.1146/annurev.polisci.3.1.475 · Cited by 2,190
Sears, D. O. (1986) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037//0022-3514.51.3.515 · Cited by 2,119
Spiral of Cynicism: The Press and the Public Good
Cappella, J. N., & Jamieson, K. H. (1997) · Cited by 1,608
Spiral of Cynicism: The Press and the Public Good
Cappella, J. N., & Jamieson, K. H. (1997) · doi:10.1093/oso/9780195090635.001.0001 · Cited by 1,388
Patterson, T. E. (1993) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 1,293
Cited by
Frenemies: How Social Media Polarizes America
Settle, J. E. (2018) · doi:10.1017/9781108560573 · Cited by 377
Balmas, M. (2014) · Communication Research · doi:10.1177/0093650212453600 · Cited by 325
Holbert, R. L., Lambe, J. L., Dudo, A. D., & Carlton, K. A. (2007) · Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media · doi:10.1080/08838150701308002 · Cited by 119
Torres, R., Gerhart, N., & Negahban, A. (2018) · ACM SIGMIS Database: the DATABASE for Advances in Information Systems · doi:10.1145/3242734.3242740 · Cited by 113
Metadata
- Authors
- Baumgartner, J., & Morris, J. S.
- Venue
- American Politics Research
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2006-05
- Volume
- 34
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 341-367
- ISSN
- 0044-7803 (ISSN-L)
- 1532-673X
- 1552-3373
- OpenAlex
- W1997338663
- Cited by
- 403
- References
- 40
- FWCI
- 17.28
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The Daily Show Effect: Candidate Evaluations, Efficacy, and American Youth. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/1532673x05280074
- The paper
- Baumgartner, J., & Morris, J. S. (2006). The Daily Show Effect: Candidate Evaluations, Efficacy, and American Youth. American Politics Research. https://doi.org/10.1177/1532673x05280074
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
