A recent study analyzing the speech patterns of President George W. Bush shows that in the months following the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, Bush became a more eloquent and articulate speaker, according to researchers.
James Meindl, director of the Center for International Leadership in School of Management, headed the study, which compared 58 speeches beginning with Bush's inauguration speech up to Sept. 11, and 59 speeches from the six months following.
According to Meindl's report, titled "Charisma Under Crisis: Presidential Leadership, Rhetoric and Media Responses Before and After 9/11," the study was done to determine whether the terrorist attacks altered Bush's communications with the American public.
"Together, these studies afforded us an opportunity to understand the shifting, mutual expectations regarding leadership that were precipitated by the events of 9/11," stated his report.
In addition to studying the president's speech patterns, Meindl and his team also examined media portrayal and public response to Bush after Sept. 11.
The idea behind Meindl's study reflects the beliefs of many Americans who were not impressed with Bush's ability as a leader during his initial weeks in office.
"People were concerned about George Bush's speech patterns," said freshman Trung Bui. "In my school, people were posting comments on contradictory things he said."
"Every time I turned on the news (before Sept. 11), they were talking about his stumbling speeches and age spots," said Bui.
According to Meindl, these attitudes were prominent before Sept. 11 and "no one expected him to be a charismatic leader."
"Prior to the events of 9/11, President George W. Bush was generally not seen as a particularly strong, charismatic leader that people would place their faith in during times of crisis or external threat," stated the report. "In a few hours on that fateful September day, mixed amongst the panoply of images, feelings and thoughts were real concerns about Bush's leadership and his ability to rise to the challenge facing the country."
Meindl said his study measured "transformation and leadership rhetoric" by constructing specific dictionaries to evaluate his "charismatic shift." In this way, Meindl compared the types of words and phrases Bush used before and after Sept. 11. Meindl then compared his results to Bush's public approval ratings.
According to Meindl's report, the Gallup poll previous to the terrorist attacks found that 51 percent of Americans approved of Bush's job performance. After the attack, the president's approval ratings jumped to 86 percent.
In his post-Sept. 11 speeches, Meindl found that Bush focused more on the "collective identity of the American people" and "referred significantly more frequently to collectives," according to the report.
The report states that Bush's speeches also "became more active, forceful, and aggressive, and he referred significantly more frequently to the hardships the American people were facing, blaming the terrorists and inciting the American people to action."
Sophomore Shawn Parker disagreed with Meindl's findings. He said he has not noticed a drastic change in Bush's speaking skills since Sept. 11 and that Bush "sounded pretty dumb at the beginning of his term."
"I don't think people respected him before 9/11, and I don't think people's viewpoints have changed since then," he said.
Meindl's findings, however, state that not only did Bush's public opinion rating increase, but that the media's portrayal of the president also used more charismatic language.
Meindl's report is currently under review by the Journal of Applied Psychology. He conducted his research with two of his former Ph.D students, Michelle Bligh of the Kravis Leadership Institute at Claremont McKenna College and Jeffrey Kohles, currently attending California State University at San Marcos.
