Voting Behavior Lecture Notes PDF

Voting behavior Comparative Politics Lecture 11 1 Voting behavior 2 Main questions of the field What motivates voters when performing political activities? Who acts politically and who does not? What shapes political preferences/choices? F...

Voting behavior Comparative Politics Lecture 11 1 Voting behavior 2 Main questions of the field What motivates voters when performing political activities? Who acts politically and who does not? What shapes political preferences/choices? Findings only applicable in democracies! 3 History of researching voting behavior From ancient times until the interwar period: deductive reasoning Interwar period: political science collaborating with economics, behavioral sciences and marketing -> empirical models 1990s onward – psychological research gets traction 4 Party identification model (Michigan model) 5 Basics of the model Created at the University of Michigan in the 1950s (The American Voter, 1960) Angus Campbell, Philip Converse and colleagues Voters identify with a party and vote for that party no matter what happens No rational or emotional reason to switch parties Party identification is more stable than any other political attitude, but is not as strong as certain other attitudes (e.g., religion) 6 Potential dynamics of the model Family socialization Socialization of early political experiences Only an intermediate effect; other models are better at explaining preferences Very much based on US politics 7  Partisan dealignment Average annual Country Partisan voters (%) Time period change (%) United Kingdom 93 –0.32 1964–2010 Australia 92 –0.20 1967–2010 Canada 90 –0.54 1965–2006 New Zealand 87 –1.12 1975–2008 Italy 80 –0.78 1975–2008 Germany 78 –0.51 1972–2009 United States 77 –0.33 1952–2008 France 73 –0.79 1967–2002 Japan 70 –0.59 1962–2000 Austria 67 –0.56 1969–2009 Norway 66 –0.66 1965–2005 Sweden 64 –0.85 1968–2010 Switzerland 61 –0.63 1971–2007 Finland 57 –0.26 1975–2007 Denmark 52 –0.03 1971–2005 Netherlands 38 –0.19 1971–2006 8 Types of parties and partisanship 9 Sociological model (Columbia model) 10 Basics of the model Created at Columbia University in the 1940s Lazarsfeld, Berelson and colleagues Political preferences and actions are linked to group membership Social groups are politically homogenous 11 Potential dynamics of the model Group interests -> political interests Opinion leadership Identity voting Voting based on external features 12 Class dealignment Class-based voting has decreased since the 1980s New groups are forming 13 Rational choice model 14 Basics of the model Created in the interwar period mostly by economists Hotelling, Downs and others Voters act to further their interests -> instrumental voting Voting based on issues -> issue voting 15 Potential dynamics of the model Voters have clear issue preferences (at least on key issues) Voters evaluate performance and policy platforms They choose the options/actions that further their own interests the most Identity voting Voting based on external features 16 17 Dominant ideology model 18 Basics and dynamics of the model Critical model created in the 1970s Critique of all other models Voters do not make their own decisions, they are made by the elites and the media Subconscious decisions or decisions made by interpreting positions emphasized through education and communication 19 Psychological model 20 Basics of the model Created in the 1990s on Marcus, Taber and others Lot of different models based on different premises Voters act based on emotional, subconscious dynamics that they rationalize later 21 Dynamics of the model Political campaigns and events induce emotional reactions (quicker and stronger than rational ones) Voters behave as a result of these reactions Acting or not acting, changing preferences of staying the course is a result of emotional reactions Rational or group-based reasons are actually irrelevant 22 Thank you for your attention!