The Effects of Compulsory Voting on Political Parties

2021 ◽  
pp. 141-166
Author(s):  
Shane P. Singh
Keyword(s):  
Political Parties ◽  
Comparative Study ◽  
Survey Data ◽  
Electoral Systems ◽  
Multilevel Analyses ◽  
Compulsory Voting ◽  
Original Survey ◽  
The Comparative Study

Chapter 7 test the expectations about compulsory voting’s effects on political parties. Analyses shown in the first part of the chapter leverage data from the Comparative Study of Electoral Systems and the original survey data from Argentina. The results are somewhat perfunctory but suggest that parties may expend less effort mobilizing turnout under strict obligatory voting, especially of ideological moderates. The latter portion of the chapter presents multilevel analyses of data from the Comparative Manifestos Project. As anticipated in Chapter 6, it finds that mainstream parties de-emphasize ideologically salient issues in order to moderate their stances under enforced compulsory voting. It also finds some evidence that, as predicted, non-mainstream parties take more extreme positions where voters are compelled to the polls.

The Effects of Compulsory Voting on Individuals

2021 ◽  
pp. 79-132
Author(s):  
Shane P. Singh
Keyword(s):  
Comparative Study ◽  
Survey Data ◽  
National Survey ◽  
Multilevel Models ◽  
Political Attitudes ◽  
Electoral Systems ◽  
Political Sophistication ◽  
Election Study ◽  
Compulsory Voting ◽  
The Comparative Study

This chapter empirically tests the expectation that compulsory voting moderates the effects of orientations toward democracy on political attitudes, behavior, and sophistication. It first employs cross-national survey data from the AmericasBarometer and the Comparative Study of Electoral Systems to estimate multilevel models. It also uses cross-cantonal data from the Swiss Election Study, and novel survey data from Argentina collected for this book. The analyses of the Swiss and Argentine data leverage age-based thresholds in the application of compulsory voting with discontinuity models. Results suggest that, in line with the predictions of the theory advanced in Chapter 3, compulsory voting polarizes behavior and attitudes, and broadens gaps in political sophistication levels, among those with negative and positive orientations toward democracy.

Digital Campaigning across Space

2020 ◽  
pp. 44-71
Author(s):  
Rachel K. Gibson
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Comparative Study ◽  
Multilevel Modeling ◽  
Survey Data ◽  
Electoral Systems ◽  
The United States ◽  
Voter Mobilization ◽  
Internet Penetration ◽  
Digital Campaigning ◽  
The Comparative Study

This chapter examines developments in digital campaigning in comparative perspective. It does so using survey data from Wave 4 of the Comparative Study of Electoral Systems (CSES) to measure the extent of digital voter contact occurring in eighteen countries (2011–2015). Based on the understanding that extensive voter mobilization is a key feature of a country’s entry into phase IV digital campaigning, the authors infer which nations have progressed more rapidly through the four phases, and are thus most advanced in their use of digital campaign tools. Using this measure, they find that the United States is the most advanced nation and Thailand the least. They investigate the rankings more systematically using multilevel modeling techniques, and find that presidential elections and higher internet penetration rates are most predictive of higher rates of digital campaign contact. The results are helpful in building expectations about the digital campaign performance of the four national case studies.

scholarly journals Who Responds? Voters, Parties and Issue Attention

2014 ◽  
Vol 46 (3) ◽  
pp. 633-654 ◽  
Author(s):  
Heike Klüver ◽  
Jae-Jae Spoon
Keyword(s):  
Political Parties ◽  
Comparative Study ◽  
Electoral Systems ◽  
Political Representation ◽  
National Election ◽  
Niche Parties ◽  
Election Manifestos ◽  
Issue Attention ◽  
The Comparative Study ◽  
Election Studies

Do parties listen to their voters? This article addresses this important question by moving beyond position congruence to explore whether parties respond to voters’ issue priorities. It argues that political parties respond to voters in their election manifestos, but that their responsiveness varies across different party types: namely, that large parties are more responsive to voters’ policy priorities, while government parties listen less to voters’ issue demands. The study also posits that niche parties are not generally more responsive to voter demands, but that they are more responsive to the concerns of their supporters in their owned issue areas. To test these theoretical expectations, the study combines data from the Comparative Manifestos Project with data on voters’ policy priorities from the Comparative Study of Electoral Systems and various national election studies across eighteen European democracies in sixty-three elections from 1972–2011. Our findings have important implications for understanding political representation and democratic linkage.

Elections Activate Partisanship across Countries

2018 ◽  
Vol 113 (1) ◽  
pp. 248-253 ◽  
Author(s):  
SHANE P. SINGH ◽  
JUDD R. THORNTON
Keyword(s):  
Political Parties ◽  
Comparative Study ◽  
Strong Evidence ◽  
Electoral Systems ◽  
Causal Effects ◽  
Political Actors ◽  
Party Attachment ◽  
The Comparative Study ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Cross National

It has long been argued that elections amplify partisan predispositions. We take advantage of the timing of the cross-national post-election surveys included in the Comparative Study of Electoral Systems to explore the effects that elections have on individuals’ attachments to political parties. Within these surveys, under the assumption that the dates on which respondents are interviewed are assigned independent of factors known to affect partisanship, we are able to identify the causal effects of election salience on partisan attachments. We find strong evidence that election salience increases the probability of one having a party attachment, increases the strength of attachments, and heightens the relationship between partisanship and evaluations of political actors. Empirical explorations of our identifying assumption bolster its validity. Our results substantiate the causal role that elections play in activating partisanship.

scholarly journals Remembering One’s Representative: How District Magnitude and List Type Affect Candidate Recognition

2017 ◽  
Vol 66 (3) ◽  
pp. 786-807 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brenda Van Coppenolle
Keyword(s):  
Comparative Study ◽  
Survey Data ◽  
Differential Effect ◽  
Electoral Systems ◽  
Electoral System ◽  
List Type ◽  
Individual Level ◽  
District Magnitude ◽  
The Comparative Study

District magnitude and list type shape the incentives for politicians to develop a personal vote. If voters also react to these strategies, their knowledge about candidates should be influenced by these features of the electoral system. This article directly tests the responsiveness of voters by employing individual-level survey data from the Comparative Study of Electoral Systems. As district magnitude increases, more people remember at least one candidate in closed list systems, but there is no such effect in open list systems. These influences are also larger for non-voters than for voters. A measure of political contact is not affected in this way. The differential effect of district magnitude can be explained by a different campaign focus.

scholarly journals Winning, Losing, and the Quality of Democracy

2021 ◽  
pp. 003232172110261
Author(s):  
Richard Nadeau ◽  
Jean-François Daoust ◽  
Ruth Dassonneville
Keyword(s):  
Comparative Study ◽  
Electoral Systems ◽  
Motivated Reasoning ◽  
Quality Of Democracy ◽  
Electoral Democracy ◽  
Democratic Systems ◽  
The Comparative Study

Citizens who voted for a party that won the election are more satisfied with democracy than those who did not. This winner–loser gap has recently been found to vary with the quality of electoral democracy: the higher the quality of democracy, the smaller the gap. However, we do not know what drives this relationship. Is it driven by losers, winners, or both? And Why? Linking our work to the literature on motivated reasoning and macro salience and benefiting from the Comparative Study of Electoral Systems project—covering 163 elections in 51 countries between 1996 and 2018, our results show that the narrower winner–loser gap in well-established electoral democracies is not only a result of losers being more satisfied with democracy, but also of winners being less satisfied with their victory. Our findings carry important implications since a narrow winner–loser gap appears as a key feature of healthy democratic systems.

scholarly journals Retrospective Voting and the Polarization of Available Alternatives

2019 ◽  
Vol 53 (1) ◽  
pp. 99-115 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dieter Stiers ◽  
Ruth Dassonneville
Keyword(s):  
Comparative Study ◽  
Electoral Systems ◽  
Performance Evaluations ◽  
Retrospective Voting ◽  
Theoretical Perspectives ◽  
Ideological Polarization ◽  
Clarity Of Responsibility ◽  
Ideological Differences ◽  
The Government ◽  
The Comparative Study

AbstractGovernment cohesiveness is known to moderate retrospective voting. While previous work on this topic has focused on characteristics of the government, we build on the literature on clarity of responsibility and the literature on valence to argue that the extent to which government and opposition are ideologically distinct also moderates retrospective voting. Two alternative expectations follow from these two theoretical perspectives. While the clarity of responsibility framework leads to the expectation that a larger difference between government and opposition will strengthen retrospective voting, the valence literature presumes that retrospective voting is stronger when ideological differences are small. Using the data of the Comparative Study of Electoral Systems (CSES) project, we find evidence that is in line with the clarity of responsibility framework: the higher the degree of ideological polarization between government and opposition, the larger the effect of retrospective performance evaluations on the vote.

Right populist parties and support for strong leaders

2020 ◽  
pp. 135406882092085
Author(s):  
Todd Donovan
Keyword(s):  
Comparative Study ◽  
Survey Data ◽  
Liberal Democracy ◽  
Electoral Systems ◽  
Radical Right ◽  
World Values Survey

This article tests if radical right populist (RRP) parties draw support from voters with non-mainstream, illiberal attitudes. This follows from assumptions that these parties have rhetorical, stylistic and practical critiques of liberal democracy that appeal to people with politically authoritarian attitudes. I use Module 5 Comparative Study of Electoral Systems data and Wave 7 World Values Survey data to test how authoritarian attitudes, in particular, approval of strong, unchecked leaders, may be associated with support for RRP parties. Of 12 unique cases where RRP parties received at least 5% support in a recent election, in most cases preferences for strong, unchecked leaders differentiated RRP party supporters from supporters of other parties generally, and from supporters of centre-right parties. In some cases, negative views of democracy, and acceptance of army rule, also characterized RRP supporters. Most cases have evidence consistent with the hypotheses, with the strongest evidence from supporters of Austria’s FPÖ and Germany’s AfD.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document