Political debate is a cornerstone of democracy and a vital way to inform the public on important policy issues. Yet, it is not without its challenges. Debate can be polarizing and may increase partisanship and distrust in institutions. However, productive political debates are possible if people learn to understand and respect the opinions of those with whom they disagree. It is crucial that citizens have a clear understanding of the issues and the reasons behind a person’s position in order to participate in democratic deliberation and shape public policy.

Whether it is at the university level or on national television, political debate provides voters with an opportunity to assess the candidates’ positions and policies. It also helps voters decide which candidate to support. But the quality of the debates is often criticized by some and the credibility of the Commission on Presidential Debates (CPD) has been called into question.

The CPD is responsible for a series of televised presidential debates that are formally sanctioned by the major political parties and aired on the major networks. The debates are structured in a way that allows for protected time and an equal amount of speaking time for each candidate. In addition, the CPD advises sponsors of non-presidential debates (gubernatorial, congressional, mayoral and local legislative) on production issues and voter education initiatives.

To better understand how people debate in real life, a Berkeley Haas assistant professor and her colleagues conducted two studies. The first involved 215 individuals who participated in a behavioral science research lab, and the second included 526 participants recruited online. In both cases, participants were asked to freely recall a political debate they observed or participated in over the past year. They were also asked to think about who they had debated with and how the exchanges made them feel afterward.