Call for proposals
PROTAGORAS Symposium 2022
"Polls as a means of political legitimation"
Deeply political, both in their production and their effects, polls provide a communication tool and a symbolic device (Blondiaux, 1998; Champagne, 2015) on which candidates, political parties, politicians, and journalists rely to speak on behalf of the citizens. “Public opinion” harnessed through polls derives its performative force from a “scientific” measure: a percentage established by polls (Aldrin & Hubé, 2017) – allowing to perceive information as reliable and incontestable (Grunberg & Mayer, 2014). As a commercial product (e.g., the methods used, their purpose) polls are often controversial. It is key to address the innate biases (Knobloch-Westerwick et al., 2020) and blind spots of those who develop and exploit polls to feed a campaign strategy or justify a public stance (Corzine & Woolley, 2018).
While major polling failures speak for themselves (Giuliani, 2018), polls can be used to instrumentalise or even manipulate public opinion (Maquis, 2005). The legitimacy of polls is regularly questioned, raising suspicions (e.g., the financing of partially manipulated polls serving exclusively partisan political interests like the recent scandal of faked polls in Austria) and mistrust (e.g., the criticism of some editorial offices, such as the newspaper Ouest France, to the detriment of a genuine debate).
Today, the importance of opinion polls must be discussed in the context of an increasing “doxophrenia”, i.e., the obsessive need to quantify opinions, and an increasing mistrust (of citizens as well as political actors) towards opinion polls. The focus of this conference is thus on questions of legitimacy and legitimation as well as opinion polls as an instrument of political communication: polling expertise considered both as a method of forecasting and political framing.
The discussions will focus on three thematic areas:
1. The reception of polls by actors in the media
Opinion polls describe and influence dynamics of election campaigns and other political events. Opinion surveys constitute a “hot topic” dictating the pace of campaigns and fostering the “priming” effect (Scheufele, 2000; Tewksbury & Dietram, 2007; Tryggvason, 2021). The media guarantees opinion polls a central role in defining today’s public debate (Kessler, 2002). Moreover, survey results are instrumental in “framing” political issues or controversies (Herbst, 1998; Entman, 2007). This first focus therefore addresses the interactions between pollsters, political staff, and actors in the media. It proposes to examine the media’s responsibility in influencing public opinion. Questions referring to this area are: How are different political parties framed in relation to published poll results? What effects in perception are created among voters?
2. The instrumentalization of polls by political communication
In addition to their decisive impact on electoral processes at the national level, opinion data constitute an essential resource for the legitimisation of the European Union. Despite a rigorous methodology, the production and use of opinion data by and for the EU still raises several questions – due to certain heuristic shortcuts (Gaxie et al., 2011), the diachronic dimension of the surveys (Aldrin, 2010) or an inherent cognitivist bias (Aldrin, 2009). Thus, the third area focuses on the Eurobarometer as a tool for legitimising the EU as a transnational political project. How does Eurobarometer data represent the European political project with its citizens and what are its limitations?
3. The role of Eurobarometers
In addition to their decisive impact on electoral processes at the national level, opinion data constitute an essential resource for the legitimisation of the European Union. Despite a rigorous methodology, the production and use of opinion data by and for the EU still raises several questions – due to certain heuristic shortcuts (Gaxie et al., 2011), the diachronic dimension of the surveys (Aldrin, 2010) or an inherent cognitivist bias (Aldrin, 2009). Thus, the third area focuses on the Eurobarometer as a tool for legitimising the EU as a transnational political project. How does Eurobarometer data represent the European political project with its citizens and what are its limitations?
The symposium will organise separate panels in French and English
THE SYMPOSIUM WILL BE FOLLOWED BY A PUBLICATION IN THE “CAHIERS PROTAGORAS” (Éditions L’Harmattan)
Submission and participation guidelines
Proposals (in Word or PDF format) should include:
- In a separate file: name, professional or academic status, institutional affiliation, contact details of the author(s) (e-mail and postal addresses).
- The title of the paper (maximum 180 characters including spaces).
- The axis of the conference within which the paper is to be presented.
- A 500-word abstract (excluding references) highlighting the interest of the contribution and including an overview of the problematic.
- Proposals for papers may be presented either as reflective analyses based on recent and completed empirical research, or as analyses of professional communication practises.
Deadline for proposals is April 29, 2022. Please send your abstract to conference@protagoras.be.
Abstracts will be evaluated through a double-blind review process by the scientific committee. Authors will be notified of the decision of the organisational committee on May 13, 2022.
Practicalities
Dates of the Symposium: 9 & 10 June 2022
Partners
Organisation Committee
Nicolas BAYGERT
IHECS-Protagoras, Sciences Po (IEP Paris) & Université Libre de Bruxelles.
Baptiste BUIDIN
IHECS-Protagoras Research Fellow, Université Libre de Bruxelles.
Thierry DEVARS
CELSA Sorbonne-University, (GRIPIC).
Esther DURIN
Applied Research Coordinator (IHECS), Université Paul-Valéry (Praxiling).
Isabelle LE BRETON FALEZAN
CELSA Sorbonne-University, (GRIPIC).
Élise LE MOOING-MAAS
President of the IHECS PR Section, Université Rennes 2 (PREFics).
Loïc NICOLAS
IHECS-Protagoras Research Fellow.
Gisela REITER
FHWien der WKW University of Applied Sciences for Management & Communication.
Uta RUSSMANN
University of Innsbruck.
John VANDENHAUTE
Research & Development Coordinator, IHECS-Protagoras.
Scientific Committee
Nicolas Baygert
IHECS-Protagoras, Sciences Po (IEP Paris) & Université Libre de Bruxelles.
Vincent Carlino
Université catholique de l’Ouest (UCO), Nantes.
Lucie Château
Tilburg University.
Anne-Marie Cotton
Haute école Artevelde de Gent, Université Bordeaux Montaigne (MICA)
François Debras
Université de Liège (HELMO).
Lucile Desmoulin
Université Paris-Est Marne-la-Vallée (DICEN-IDF)
Thierry Devars
CELSA Sorbonne-University, (GRIPIC).
Charles Devellennes
University of Kent
Esther Durin
IHECS-Protagoras, Université Paul-Valéry (Praxiling).
Helen Etchanchu
Montpellier Business School
Alexandre Eyries
Université de Bourgogne (Ciméos)
Adrien Jahier
IHECS-Protagoras Research Fellow.
Amanda Klekowski von Koppenfels
University of Kent (BSIS).
Alexander Kondratov
Université Libre de Bruxelles (ReSIC), IHECS.
Isabelle Le Breton Falezan
CELSA Sorbonne-University, (GRIPIC).
Élise Le Moing-Maas
IHECS-Protagoras, Université Rennes 2 (PREFics).
Brieuc Lits
Université Saint-Louis – Bruxelles
Philippe Marion
Université Catholique de Louvain (ORM)
Loïc Nicolas
IHECS-Protagoras Research Fellow.
Alvaro Oleart
Vrije Universiteit (VU), Amsterdam.
Uta Rußmann
University of Innsbruck.
Kelly Céleste VOSSEN
Université Saint-Louis, Bruxelles
References
Aldrin, P. (2009). L’Union Européenne face à l’opinion. Construction et usages politiques de l’opinion comme problème communautaire, Savoir/Agir,1 (7), p. 13-23.
Aldrin, P. (2010). L’invention de l’opinion publique européenne. Genèse intellectuelle et politique de l’Eurobaromètre (1950-1973). Politix 1(89), p. 79-101.
Aldrin, P.,& Hubé, N. (2017) Introduction à la communication politique. Louvain-la-Neuve : De Boeck Supérieur.
Belot, C., Boussaguet, L. & Halpern, C. (2016). La fabrique d’une opinion publique européenne : Sélection, usages et effets des instruments. Politique européenne, 54, 84-125.
Blondiaux, L. (1998). La fabrique de l’opinion. Une histoire sociale des sondages. Paris : Seuil.
Brochot, V. (2013). Le sondage d’opinion : attribut de la démocratie ou manipulation de l’opinion. Pouvoirs, 145, 141-154.
Champagne, P. (2015). Faire l’opinion : le nouveau jeu politique. Paris : Minuit.
Chou, H.-Y. (2019). Labeling candidates as underdogs in political communications: The moderation of candidate-related factors. Electoral Studies, 59, 120–135.
Corzine, J.S., & Woolley, P.J. (2018). In Defense of Polls, Though Not Necessarily Pollsters, Pundits or Strategists. Political Science and Politics, 51(1), pp. 159-164.
Entman, R. M. (2007). Framing bias: Media in the distribution of power. Journal of communication, 57(1), 163-173.
Gaxie, D., Hubé, N., De Lassalle, M., et Rowell, J. (2011). L’Europe des Européens. Enquête comparative sur les perceptions de l’Europe. Economica, coll. « Etudes Politiques ».
Grunberg, G., & Mayer, N. (2014). L’effet sondage. Des citoyens ordinaires aux élites politiques. In: Y. Déloye et al., Institutions, élections, opinions (pp. 219-236), Paris : Presses de Sciences po.
Giuliani, M. (2018). Making sense of pollsters’ errors. An analysis of the 2014 second-order European election predictions. Journal of Elections Public Opinion and Parties, 1-17.
Herbst, S. (1998). Reading Public Opinion. How Political Actors View the Democratic Process. Chicago : The University of Chicago Press.
Jacobs, L.R. & Shapiro, R.Y. (1995). Presidential Manipulation of Polls and Public Opinion: The Nixon Administration and the Pollsters. Political Science Quarterly, 110(4), 519–538.
Kessler, E. (2002). « La folie des sondeurs. De la trahison des opinions ». Paris : Denoël.
Knobloch-Westerwick, S., Mothes, C., & Polavin, N. (2020). Confirmation Bias, Ingroup Bias, and Negativity Bias in Selective Exposure to Political Information. Communication Research, 47(1), 104–124.
Marquis, L (2005). Sondages d’opinion et communication politique. Les Cahiers du CEVIPOF, 38, Centre de recherches politiques de Sciences Po.
Scheufele, D.A. (2000). Agenda-Setting, Priming, and Framing Revisited: Another Look at Cognitive Effects of Political Communication. Mass Communication & Society, 3(2-3), 297-316.
Scheufele, D.A., & Tewksbury, D. (2007). Framing, Agenda Setting, and Priming: The Evolution of Three Media Effects Models. Journal of Communication, 57(1), 9–20.
Tryggvason, O. (2021). The Winner-Loser Spiral in Political News Coverage: Investigating the Impact of Poll Coverage on Subsequent Party Coverage. Political Communication, 38(6), 672–690.