This study examines politics disadvantages used in competitive policy debate. Specifically, this research examines politics disadvantages for their role and relevance in deliberation, an important form of political communication. Deliberation is the means by which citizens can engage in discussions of salient policy issues, and make political judgments about policies.
This study developed a grounded theory about the type of deliberation manifest in politics disadvantages. Pre-constructed politics disadvantages from websites such as PlanetDebate.com, Cross-X.com, as well as from summer policy debate workshops were analyzed to develop a grounded theory. Through the process of coding and theoretical memoing, categories of political communication emerged from the disadvantage shells. The theory indicated that politics disadvantages develop an acontextual, narrowly adversarial view of deliberation. This theory was juxtaposed against already established theories of deliberation to reveal that politics disadvantages show serious deficiencies in the ways in which deliberation is taught to policy debaters.
","abstract_html":"<p>This study examines politics disadvantages used in competitive policy debate. Specifically, this research examines politics disadvantages for their role and relevance in deliberation, an important form of political communication. Deliberation is the means by which citizens can engage in discussions of salient policy issues, and make political judgments about policies.</p> <p>This study developed a grounded theory about the type of deliberation manifest in politics disadvantages. Pre-constructed politics disadvantages from websites such as PlanetDebate.com, Cross-X.com, as well as from summer policy debate workshops were analyzed to develop a grounded theory. Through the process of coding and theoretical memoing, categories of political communication emerged from the disadvantage shells. The theory indicated that politics disadvantages develop an acontextual, narrowly adversarial view of deliberation. This theory was juxtaposed against already established theories of deliberation to reveal that politics disadvantages show serious deficiencies in the ways in which deliberation is taught to policy debaters.</p>","abstract_has_math":false,"creators":["Ernst, Timothy C."],"institution":null,"degree_name":"Master of Arts (M.A.)","degree_level":"Thesis - Pacific Access Restricted","degree_discipline":"Communication","degree_department":null,"school":null,"contributors":["Paul Turpin"],"advisors":[],"committee_chairs":[],"committee_members":[],"year":2011,"date_issued":"2011-01-01T08:00:00Z","date_published":"2011-01-01T08:00:00Z","updated_at":"2026-07-24T05:36:46Z","subjects":["Communication in politics","Discourse analysis Political aspects","Political participation United States","Rhetoric Political aspects","Communication","Social and Behavioral Sciences"],"languages":[],"rights":[],"rights_urls":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/"],"identifier_entries":[]},"links":{"outbound_url":"https://scholarlycommons.pacific.edu/uop_etds/768","outbound_label":"Repository record","outbound_source":"dc:identifier"},"metadata_groups":[{"id":"people","label":"People","entries":[{"key":"dc:contributor","label":"Contributor","values":["Paul Turpin"]},{"key":"dc:creator","label":"Author","values":["Ernst, Timothy C."]}]},{"id":"academic_context","label":"Academic Context","entries":[{"key":"dc:date.available","label":"Dc Date Available","values":["2011-01-01T08:00:00Z"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_discipline","label":"Discipline","values":["Communication"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_level","label":"Degree Level","values":["Thesis - Pacific Access Restricted"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_name","label":"Degree Name","values":["Master of Arts (M.A.)"]}]},{"id":"subjects_keywords","label":"Subjects and Keywords","entries":[{"key":"dc:subject","label":"Dc Subject","values":["Communication in politics","Discourse analysis Political aspects","Political participation United States","Rhetoric Political aspects","Communication","Social and Behavioral Sciences"]}]},{"id":"language_rights","label":"Language and Rights","entries":[{"key":"dc:rights","label":"Dc Rights","values":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/"]}]},{"id":"identifiers","label":"Identifiers","entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier","label":"Identifier","values":["https://scholarlycommons.pacific.edu/uop_etds/768"]}]},{"id":"additional","label":"Additional Metadata","entries":[{"key":"dc:description.abstract","label":"Abstract","values":["This study examines politics disadvantages used in competitive policy debate. Specifically, this research examines politics disadvantages for their role and relevance in deliberation, an important form of political communication. Deliberation is the means by which citizens can engage in discussions of salient policy issues, and make political judgments about policies.
This study developed a grounded theory about the type of deliberation manifest in politics disadvantages. Pre-constructed politics disadvantages from websites such as PlanetDebate.com, Cross-X.com, as well as from summer policy debate workshops were analyzed to develop a grounded theory. Through the process of coding and theoretical memoing, categories of political communication emerged from the disadvantage shells. The theory indicated that politics disadvantages develop an acontextual, narrowly adversarial view of deliberation. This theory was juxtaposed against already established theories of deliberation to reveal that politics disadvantages show serious deficiencies in the ways in which deliberation is taught to policy debaters.
"]},{"key":"dc:source","label":"Dc Source","values":["116"]},{"key":"dc:title","label":"Title","values":["Toward a grounded normative theory of strategies of political communication used in politics disadvantages in policy debate"]}]}],"canonical_facts":{"dc:contributor":["Paul Turpin"],"dc:creator":["Ernst, Timothy C."],"dc:date.available":["2011-01-01T08:00:00Z"],"dc:description.abstract":["This study examines politics disadvantages used in competitive policy debate. Specifically, this research examines politics disadvantages for their role and relevance in deliberation, an important form of political communication. Deliberation is the means by which citizens can engage in discussions of salient policy issues, and make political judgments about policies.
This study developed a grounded theory about the type of deliberation manifest in politics disadvantages. Pre-constructed politics disadvantages from websites such as PlanetDebate.com, Cross-X.com, as well as from summer policy debate workshops were analyzed to develop a grounded theory. Through the process of coding and theoretical memoing, categories of political communication emerged from the disadvantage shells. The theory indicated that politics disadvantages develop an acontextual, narrowly adversarial view of deliberation. This theory was juxtaposed against already established theories of deliberation to reveal that politics disadvantages show serious deficiencies in the ways in which deliberation is taught to policy debaters.
"],"dc:identifier":["https://scholarlycommons.pacific.edu/uop_etds/768"],"dc:rights":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/"],"dc:source":["116"],"dc:subject":["Communication in politics","Discourse analysis Political aspects","Political participation United States","Rhetoric Political aspects","Communication","Social and Behavioral Sciences"],"dc:title":["Toward a grounded normative theory of strategies of political communication used in politics disadvantages in policy debate"],"thesis:degree_discipline":["Communication"],"thesis:degree_level":["Thesis - Pacific Access Restricted"],"thesis:degree_name":["Master of Arts (M.A.)"]},"updated_at":"2026-07-24T05:36:46Z"}