Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

CiteULike is a free service for managing and discovering scholarly references - click here to get started.

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
American Politics Research
This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Free Full Text (Free PDF) Free
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Goodman, C.
Right arrow Articles by Murray, G. R.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Do You See What I See? Perceptions of Party Differences and Voting Behavior

Craig Goodman

Texas Tech University, Lubbock

Gregg R. Murray

Texas Tech University, Lubbock

We approach the issues of partisanship and voting behavior by focusing specifically on a seldom-studied group—the substantial proportion of citizens who see little to no important differences between the major parties. Motivated by the heuristics and burgeoning behavioral economics literatures, we conclude that party cues help reduce uncertainty for voters. More specifically, for voters lacking these cues, we expect that there will be a bias toward the incumbent candidate or party, which is motivated by the desire to decrease the potential costs of postdecision regrets. Similarly, we expect that these individuals are likely to delay choosing between candidates and may abstain from voting altogether, which is driven by a shortage of justifications on which to base the decision. We develop measures of perceived party differences based on symbolic and operational differences using data from the American National Election Study and find significant support for our hypotheses in the context of presidential elections.

Key Words: party identification • political parties • voting • elections • heuristics • partisan cues • behavioral economics • partisanship

References

  • Abramson, P.R., Aldrich, J.H., & Rohde, D.W. (2003). Change and continuity in the 2000 and 2002 elections. Washington, DC: CQ Press .
  • Abramson, P.R., Aldrich, J.H., & Rohde, D.W. (2006). Change and continuity in the 2004 elections. Washington, DC: CQ Press .
  • Aldrich, J.H. (1995). Why parties? The origin and transformation of political parties in America. Chicago: University of Chicago Press .
  • Alvarez, R.M. (1998). Information and elections (Rev. ed.). Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press .
  • American National Election Study. (1995- 2000). The ANES guide to public opinion and electoral behavior. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan, Center for Political Studies [Producer and Distributor] . Available from http://www.electionstudies.org/nesguide/nesguide.htm
  • Anderson, C.J. (2003). The psychology of doing nothing: Forms of decision avoidance result from reason and emotion . Psychological Bulletin, 129, 139-167 .[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Bartels, L.M. (1996). Uninformed votes: Information effects in presidential elections . American Journal of Political Science, 40, 194-230 .[CrossRef][Web of Science]
  • Bartels, L.M. (2000). Partisanship and voting behavior, 1952-1996. American Journal of Political Science, 44, 35-50.
  • Brady, H.E., & Sniderman, P.M. (1985). Attitude attribution: A group basis for political reasoning . American Political Science Review, 79, 1061-1078 .[CrossRef][Web of Science]
  • Brewer, M.D., & Stonecash, J.M. (2007). Split: Class and cultural divides in American politics. Washington, DC: CQ Press .
  • Calvert, R.L. (1985). The value of biased information: A rational choice model of political advice . Journal of Politics, 47, 530-555 .[CrossRef][Web of Science]
  • Campbell, A., Converse, P.E., Miller, W.E., & Stokes, D.E. (1960). The American voter. Chicago: University of Chicago Press .
  • Cox, G.W., & McCubbins, M.D. (1993). Legislative leviathan: Party government in the House. Berkeley: University of California Press .
  • Dhar, R. (1997). Consumer preferences for a no-choice option . Journal of Consumer Research, 24, 215-231 .[CrossRef][Web of Science]
  • Downs, A. (1957). An economic theory of democracy. New York: HarperCollins .
  • Dubois, P.L. (1979). The significance of voting cues in state supreme court elections . Law and Society, 13, 757-779 .[CrossRef]
  • Fiorina, M.P. (1981). Retrospective voting in American national elections. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press .
  • Fiorina, M.P., Abrams, S.J., & Pope, J.C. (2005). Culture war? The myth of a polarized America. New York: Pearson Longman .
  • Free, L.A., & Cantril, H. (1967). The political beliefs of Americans: A study of public opinion. Rutgers, NJ: Rutgers University Press .
  • Gerber, A.S., & Green, D.P. (2000). The effects of canvassing, telephone calls, and direct mail on voter turnout: A field experiment . American Political Science Review, 94, 653-663 .[CrossRef][Web of Science]
  • Hamill, R., Lodge, M., & Blake, F. (1985). The breadth, depth, and utility of class, partisan, and ideological schemata . American Journal of Political Science, 29, 850-870 .[CrossRef][Web of Science]
  • Hetherington, M.J. (2001). Resurgent mass partisanship: The role of elite polarization . American Political Science Review, 95, 619-631 .[Web of Science]
  • Hillygus, D.S. (2005). Campaign effects and the dynamics of turnout intention in election 2000 . Journal of Politics, 67, 50-68 .[CrossRef][Web of Science]
  • Inman, J.J., & Zeelenberg, M. (2002). Regret in repeat purchase versus switching decisions: The attenuating role of decision justifiability . Journal of Consumer Research, 29, 116-128 .[CrossRef][Web of Science]
  • Jacobson, G.C. (2004). The politics of congressional elections (6th ed.) New York: Longman .
  • Jewell, M.E., & Breaux, D. (1988). The effect of incumbency on state legislative elections . Legislative Studies Quarterly, 13, 495-514 .[CrossRef][Web of Science]
  • Kam, C.D. (2005). Who toes the party line? Cues, values, and individual differences . Political Behavior, 27, 163-182 .[CrossRef][Web of Science]
  • Kuklinski, J.H., & Hurley, N.L. (1994). On hearing and interpreting political messages: A cautionary tale of citizen cue-taking . Journal of Politics, 56, 729-751 .[CrossRef][Web of Science]
  • Lau, R.R., & Redlawsk, D.P. (2001). Advantages and disadvantages of cognitive heuristics in political decision making . American Journal of Political Science, 45, 951-971 .[CrossRef][Web of Science]
  • Lineberry, R.L., & Fowler, E.P. (1967). Reformism and public policies in American cities . American Political Science Review, 61, 701-716 .[CrossRef][Web of Science]
  • Lodge, M., & Hamill, R. (1986). A partisan schemata for political information processing . American Political Science Review, 80, 505-520 .[CrossRef][Web of Science]
  • Luce, M.F. (1998). Choosing to avoid: Coping with negatively emotion-laden consumer decisions . Journal of Consumer Research, 24, 409-433 .[CrossRef][Web of Science]
  • Lupia, A. (1994). Shortcuts versus encyclopedias: Information and voting behavior in California insurance reform elections . American Political Science Review, 88, 63-76 .[CrossRef][Web of Science]
  • MacKuen, M.B., Erikson, R.S., & Stimson, J.A. (1992). Peasants or bankers? The American electorate and the U.S. economy . American Political Science Review, 86, 597-611 .[CrossRef][Web of Science]
  • McDermott, M.L. (2005). Candidate occupations and voter information shortcuts . Journal of Politics, 67, 201-219 .[CrossRef][Web of Science]
  • McDermott, M.L. (2006). Not for members only: Group endorsements as electoral information cues . Political Research Quarterly, 59, 249-257 .[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  • McKelvey, R.D., & Ordeshook, P.C. (1986). Information, electoral equilibria, and the democratic ideal . Journal of Politics, 48, 909-937 .[CrossRef][Web of Science]
  • Mondak, J.J. (1993). Public opinion and heuristic processing of source cues . Political Behavior, 15, 167-192 .[CrossRef]
  • Nadeau, R., & Lewis-Beck, M.S. (2001). National economic voting in U.S. presidential elections . Journal of Politics, 63, 159-181 .[CrossRef][Web of Science]
  • Ottati, V.C. (1990). Determinants of political judgments: The joint influence of normative and heuristic rules of inference . Political Behavior, 12, 159-179 .[CrossRef]
  • Pomper, G.M. (1966). Ethnic and group voting in nonpartisan municipal elections . Public Opinion Quarterly, 30, 79-97 .[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  • Pomper, G.M. (2005). The presidential election: The ills of American politics after 9/11. In M. Nelson (Ed.), The elections of 2004. Washington, DC: CQ Press .
  • Poole, K.T., & Rosenthal, H. (1997). Congress: A political-economic history of roll call voting. New York: Oxford University Press .
  • Popkin, S.L. (1994). The reasoning voter: Communication and persuasion in presidential campaigns. Chicago: University of Chicago Press .
  • Rahn, W.M. (1993). The role of partisan stereotypes in information processing about political candidates . American Journal of Political Science, 37, 472-496 .[CrossRef][Web of Science]
  • Riker, W.H., & Ordeshook, P.C. (1968). A theory of the calculus of voting . American Political Science Review, 62, 25-42 .[CrossRef][Web of Science]
  • Robinson, J.P., & Fleishman, J.A. (1984). Public opinion polling: Ideological trends in American public opinion . Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 472, 50-60 .[Abstract]
  • Rosenstone, S.J., & Hansen, J.M. (1993). Mobilization, participation, and democracy in America. New York: MacMillan .
  • Schaffner, B.F., & Streb, M. (2002). The partisan heuristic in low-information elections . Public Opinion Quarterly, 66, 559-581 .[Abstract]
  • Schaffner, B.F., Streb, M., & Wright, G. (2001). Teams without uniforms: The nonpartisan ballot in state and local elections . Political Research Quarterly, 54, 7-30 .[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  • Scholz, J.T., & Lubell, M. (1998). Trust and taxpaying: Testing the heuristic approach to collective action . American Journal of Political Science, 42, 398-417 .[CrossRef][Web of Science]
  • Sniderman, P.M., Hagen, M.G., Tetlock, P.E., & Brady, H.E. (1986). Reasoning chains: Causal models of policy reasoning in mass publics . British Journal of Political Science, 16, 405-430 .[CrossRef][Web of Science]
  • Snyder, J.M., Jr., & Ting, M.M. (2002). An informational rationale for political parties . American Journal of Political Science, 46, 90-110 .[CrossRef][Web of Science]
  • Squire, P., & Smith, E.R.A.N. (1988). The effect of partisan information on voters in nonpartisan elections . Journal of Politics, 50, 169-179 .[CrossRef][Web of Science]
  • Stimson, J.A. (2004). Tides of consent: How public opinion shapes American politics. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press .
  • Tversky, A., & Shafir, E. (1992). Choice under conflict: The dynamics of deferred decision . Psychological Science, 3, 358-361 .[CrossRef][Web of Science]
  • Verba, S., & Nie, N.H. (1972). Participation in America: Political democracy and social equality. New York: Harper and Row .
  • Verba, S., Nie, N.H., & Kim, J. (1978). Participation and political equality. Cambridge , UK: Cambridge University Press .
  • Verba, S., Schlozman, K.L., & Brady, H.E. (1995). Voice and equality: Civic volunteerism in American politics. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press .
  • Wolfinger, R.E., & Rosenstone, S.J. (1980). Who votes? New Haven, CT: Yale University Press .
  • Zaller, J.R. (1992). The nature and origins of mass opinion. New York: Cambridge University Press .

American Politics Research, Vol. 35, No. 6, 905-931 (2007)
DOI: 10.1177/1532673X07303755
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?



This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Free Full Text (Free PDF) Free
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Goodman, C.
Right arrow Articles by Murray, G. R.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?