Voter turnout in gubernatorial primary elections varies tremendously from state to state. This analysis hypothesizes that the highly variable turnout is the result of specific circumstances unique to each election and to each state. Using multiple regression analysis, turnout in gubernatorial primaries was examined from 1968 to 1980. The analysis identified five variables that contribute to the variance in turnout across states.
Direct democracy in Switzerland provides a particularly valuable site for the study of the direct policy consequences of low turnout. The analysis of the outcomes of 144 popular votes between 1981 and 1999 shows that the level of information held by voters matters slightly more for the outcome of a popular vote than does the level of turnout, controlling for the levels of information. About 35 percent of votes would have had a different approval rate if all citizens had voted, but even more results would have changed had voters had been much better informed. Counter to the conventional wisdom, in those cases where turnout and information did matter higher levels of turnout tended to work in favour of right-wing parties, whereas higher levels of information tended to work to favour outcomes supported by left-wing parties. Further, the findings suggest that the outcomes of popular votes are most likely to be biased when voters think an issue is unimportant and both levels of turnout and information are low. [Copyright 2006 Elsevier Ltd.]
Past voting turnout studies almost always have been static analyses. Usually they have described the relationship between participation rates and the demographic attributes, attitudes, and social experiences of members of the electorate. Since each such study ordinarily is based on a single cross-sectional survey or on statistics referring to the Election Day period alone, both turnout and its determinants are derived at the same point of time, only simultaneous correlations are possible, and the analyst cannot show how turnout is affected by temporally prior conditions.The development of multi-wave panel interviews in modern social research permits the study of attitude change, decision-making, and action over time. By re-interviewing the same respondents at intervals, political sociologists already have discovered much about how voters decide their candidate choices during the course of an election campaign. A panel design permits such process analysis not only of candidate preference but also of turnout and non-voting.
Why is turnout higher in some countries &/or in some elections than in others? Why does it increase or decrease over time? To address these questions, I start with the pioneer studies of Powell & Jackman & then review more recent research. This essay seeks to establish which propositions about the causes of variations in turnout are consistently supported by empirical evidence & which ones remain ambiguous. I point out some enigmas & gaps in the field & suggest directions for future research. Most of the research pertains to established democracies, but analyses of nonestablished democracies are also included here. References. Adapted from the source document.
▪ Abstract Why is turnout higher in some countries and/or in some elections than in others? Why does it increase or decrease over time? To address these questions, I start with the pioneer studies of Powell and Jackman and then review more recent research. This essay seeks to establish which propositions about the causes of variations in turnout are consistently supported by empirical evidence and which ones remain ambiguous. I point out some enigmas and gaps in the field and suggest directions for future research. Most of the research pertains to established democracies, but analyses of nonestablished democracies are also included here.
A number of authors, including Lijphart, Hill and Engelen, have recently advocated compulsory voting. While numerous justifications can be given for such measures, it is often said that they are necessary to realise democracy fully, for instance ensuring that everyone casts one vote (no more and no less). This argument rests on the commonly held assumption that low turnout is a problem for democracies -- a claim that the present article resists. I argue that democracy as it should be understood requires only that citizens have the opportunity to exercise power. I show that the right to vote can be valuable, even if it is not actually exercised. Leaving people to decide for themselves whether or not to vote is not only more liberal but democratic in so far as it respects their choices and makes it more likely that decisions are made by the relevant constituency. Although voluntary voting makes it likely that different groups will be unequally represented, this is not necessarily a problem; where some are more affected by a given decision there may be good democratic reasons to allow them more influence. Disproportionality can be bad where it exacerbates existing social disadvantage, but here the problem is the social disadvantage, rather than that people do not vote. Moreover, while universal turnout ensures proportionality, the problem of disproportionality is conceptually distinct from low turnout. There may be other reasons to favour higher turnout, including a concern to promote social justice, but it is not necessarily better on democratic grounds. Adapted from the source document.
A number of authors, including Lijphart, Hill and Engelen, have recently advocated compulsory voting. While numerous justifications can be given for such measures, it is often said that they are necessary to realise democracy fully, for instance ensuring that everyone casts one vote (no more and no less). This argument rests on the commonly held assumption that low turnout is a problem for democracies – a claim that the present article resists. I argue that democracy as it should be understood requires only that citizens have the opportunity to exercise power. I show that the right to vote can be valuable, even if it is not actually exercised. Leaving people to decide for themselves whether or not to vote is not only more liberal but democratic in so far as it respects their choices and makes it more likely that decisions are made by the relevant constituency. Although voluntary voting makes it likely that different groups will be unequally represented, this is not necessarily a problem; where some are more affected by a given decision there may be good democratic reasons to allow them more influence. Disproportionality can be bad where it exacerbates existing social disadvantage, but here the problem is the social disadvantage, rather than that people do not vote. Moreover, while universal turnout ensures proportionality, the problem of disproportionality is conceptually distinct from low turnout. There may be other reasons to favour higher turnout, including a concern to promote social justice, but it is not necessarily better on democratic grounds.
Diff's in voting turnout are the final outcome of continuous soc & psychol'al processes which underlie the expression & the execution of intentions. Men, older voters, & Uc voters express the highest rates of intention, are most likely to carry out an intention to vote, & are most likely to reverse an intention to abstain. In comparison, women, the young, & lower status citizens are weaker in the expression & fulfillment of turnout intentions. These diff's are due to the distribution of motivations, soc influences, & role prescriptions among groups in the electorate. The high-turnout groups are subject to those soc stimuli & att's which are associated with the highest intention rates, the strongest preserving effects on an intention to vote, & the strongest effects generating changes in intentions to abstain. Data were gathered by repeated interviews during the US election of 1950. Modified AA-IPSA.
Disease makes performing civic obligations more difficult both for the afflicted and those around them. Elections held when infectious diseases are locally prevalent are therefore likely to see lower voter turnout than are those held in healthier times. This is especially notable given the strongly seasonal incidence of influenza, which coincides with election season in some countries. This article examines the relationship between regional turnout rates in Finland and the United States from 1995 to 2015 with measures of local influenza prevalence. In both countries, regression models suggest influenza outbreaks associate with lower voting rates. This may suggest another mechanism limiting the political representation of people and communities vulnerable to ill health.
Statistical relationships in 3 representative nat'l samples of the US electorate were studied through data secured by interviews, shortly after the Presidential elections of 1956 & 1960. TV leaves a more lasting impression than newspapers & radio when conveying reminders to vote. But recollection of TV messages does not appear to have a potency lacking to any other MM: each of them alike is associated with higher turnout than the absence of any recollection. Newspaper reading may be more effective than TV in affecting voting & the fulfilment of intentions to vote. Or, perhaps a more accurate statement is that newspaper reading & TV watching are associated with partly diff modes of life with diff pol'al patterns. When practiced jointly, newspaper reading & TV watching are associated with very high rates of turnout, but TV may `add' less to the combination than newspapers. The association between MM use & turnout distinguishes only between users & non-users: extra hours do not steadily increase voting probabilities. In the age of TV, radio listening has become statistically independent of turnout. Perhaps TV is more effective in stimulating increases in the voting of less pol'ly involved people, but the data are uneven & the same diff'ial effect (if any) may be true of newspaper reading. AA.
