The analysis of political behavior operates under the assumption that political behavior is not a special form of human activity, independent of what is known about general social behavior. (Political Behavior, 1968) The majority of political behavioral research is focused on identifying not only an individual’s behavior, but also with predicting the behavior of a group of people. It is understood that these groups do not exist without individuals; therefore, it is the individual dynamic that constitutes a collective group action. This is the focus of political behavioral research. The three widely accepted behavioral models of voter choice are: the sociological model, the social-psychological model, and the rational choice model. These three models diverge in methodology and application of research, but each has provided important data regarding the factors that influence voter choice. The first behavioral model is the sociological model, or the Columbia model. The sociological model is a product of the research conducted to explain the voting behavior of the 1940 presidential election. This model surveyed the residents of Erie County, Ohio and drew conclusions based on the data collected. “The sociological model uses group level characteristics such as SES, religion, and place of residence to explain how people vote” (Bond & Smith, 417). There are six sociological factors that are viewed as group characteristics that impact vote choice, and they are race, religion, gender, income, education, and family voting history. The important findings of the researched conducted includes, but is not limited to, determining that people tend to vote in the same way that they and their family has voted previously. The sociologica... ... middle of paper ... ..., the assumption that one must be informed in order to make a rational decision, thus following the pattern of rational choice, is highly conflictual with the research indicating that the majority of Americans are simply not well informed about politics. It is because of this limitation, that the social-psychological model, as well as the rational choice model, “continue to provide the most accepted explanations of voting behavior.” (Bond & Smith, 420). Being that no one model rejects the other models and methods of determining voting behavior, it is safe to say that all three models have played an important role in the development of the field of political science. The social-psychological model, as well as the rational choice model, are the two models that best predict voting behavior, as well as establishing possible causes of why people vote the way they do.
For instance, Menand writes, “The fraction of the electorates that responds to substantive political argument is hugely outweighed by the fraction that responds to slogans, misinformation...random personal association.” Mass voters mostly pursue the wrong or irrelevant information that are irrelevant to the election; thus lead them to vote for the candidates which they do not really want. Their choices mostly lack rationalities. Many voters who are slightly informative think that they are participating in a certain issue and considering the value of the candidates; yet most of them do not have adequate information and knowledge in understanding the meaning of political terms. Voters lack judgment on their government and candidates, their minds are easily being brainwashed by a small amount of people who has informative approaches in participating governmental issue, and affect their
The United States national elections have been experiencing a steady decline of eligible voters showing up to vote. This steady decline has been ongoing since experiencing a significant increase in voter turnout from 1948 through 1960. Over the years there has been significant, meticulous research done to try to pinpoint the cause of the decline in voter turnout over years. All of this research has led to the production of an enormous number of literatures written on the perceived causes. The vast amount of literature produced has led to a number of competing explanations about this decline. The quest for the answer to the question of, why this decline in voter turnout, is very important for an overwhelming majority of Americans and our democratic system because the people/voters can only truly be represented by our government if all eligible voters go out and vote. For this paper I will examine four theories that attempt to explain the decline. The four theories that I will discuss are voting barriers, campaign contributions, negative campaign advertising, and finally the cultural explanation. However, through thorough exploration and critiques of the strengths and weaknesses of these four theories, we will find that the cultural explanation theory is currently the most persuasive theory in the group. Finally, I will also explore some reasons as to why citizens do vote as well.
Among the many ways Americans can participate in politics, voting is considered one of the most common and important ways for Americans to get involved. The outcome of any election, especially at the national level, determines who will be making and enforcing the laws that all Americans must abide by. With this in mind one might assume that all Americans are active voters, but studies show the voter turnout is actually astonishingly low. With this unsettling trend it is important to know what statistics say about voter turnout as was as the four major factors that influence participation: Socioeconomic status, education, political environment, and state electoral laws, in order to help boost turnout in future elections.
...udgetary ideas to political conduct is off base. However the essential choice making technique that individuals confront inside the political world is close enough that scientists and professionals have beneficially utilized some budgetary ideas to deal with the variables influencing voters' choices.
In the article “The Lottocracy,” the author Alexander Guerrero makes some bold assessments toward the current system of electing representatives. Alexander Guerrero reflects on the general attitude people have toward voting, analyzes why people vote the way they do and how the system is flawed. It is easy to fall into a state of thinking that one vote does not make a difference when one considers that there is little difference between the candidates. Ethos, pathos, and logos are present throughout the article to persuade and convince the audience of how flawed the current system. Guerrero appeals to his reader’s sense of logic by using examples of statistical analysis that outlines the demographics of those who are currently serving in elected
...ds, William. <a href="http://click.linksynergy.com/fs-bin/stat?id=pcZ8g7DjAzA&offerid=6424&type=2&subid=0&url=http%253A//search.borders.com/fcgi-bin/db2www/search/search.d2w/Details%253F%2526mediaType%253DBook%2526prodID%253D3901535" >Political Attitudes in the Nation & the States<IMG border=0 alt=icon width=1 height=1 src="http://ad.linksynergy.com/fs-bin/show?id=pcZ8g7DjAzA&bids=6424&type=2&subid=0" >. University North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Institute for Research in Social Science. 1974Mulcahy, Kevin and Katz, Richard. <a href="http://click.linksynergy.com/fs-bin/stat?id=pcZ8g7DjAzA&offerid=6424&type=2&subid=0&url=http%253A//search.borders.com/fcgi-bin/db2www/search/search.d2w/Details%253F%2526mediaType%253DBook%2526prodID%253D14579075" >America Votes: What You Should Know About Elections Today<IMG border=0 alt=icon width=1 height=1 src="http://ad.linksynergy.com/fs-bin/show?id=pcZ8g7DjAzA&bids=6424&type=2&subid=0" >. New Jersey, Prentice Hall Inc. 1976.U.S. News & World Report Politics Inside and Out Washington D.C., U.S. News and World Report. 1970
In conclusion, it can clearly be seen that, because of the inequality to vote, gender, religious and race exclusions were pronounced side effects. Gender exclusions were shown through the inequality to vote due to the views of women in society. Religious exclusions were expressed through the uneven opportunities to vote through the prejudice set against the religions. And, racial exclusions were shown through the lack of the ability to vote be the intentional discrimination that these races were victims of. While others may say that these exclusions of groups can be seen through other actions, voting inequalities straightforwardly shows this. This is because when only specific groups can vote, it can be seen that the other groups are unfairly treated to their franchise.
Mullainathan, S., & Washington, E. (2009). Sticking with your vote: Cognitive dissonance and political attitudes. American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, 1(1), 86-111.
I am responding to Micheal Schudson’s essay titled “America’s Ignorant Voter”. He makes several arguments against whether America having relatively ignorant voters poses a problem to our society, and whether it’s becoming worse over the years. One of the arguments he poses as to why Americans seem so clueless about political matters is due to the complexities of our nation’s political institutions.
America’s low voter turnout has been attributed to by the political parties’ failure to enliven the potential voters with the awareness and competitiveness in elections and the overall difficulty of the registration and voting process. The research portion of this project was predominantly provided from four books focused on voter turnout, whether it was perceived to be increasing or decreasing. The article used was found using one of the books and altogether the sources provided analytical and institutional perspectives on American voter turnout. I believe voter turnout, along with voter registration is steadily declining in America due to multiple factors, though the topics touched on above are largely impacting us today.
The Rational-Activist Model in which voters use elections as a policy expression. Individual citizens are expected to be informed politically, involved, rational, and above all, active (pg 19). This model puts a burden on citizens who are expected to be informed and vote accordingly.
This encourages the use of sensational and misleading advertising and may have a negative effect on campaigning techniques. While politicians no longer need to try to convince citizens to go out and vote, they still need to find ways to maximize their vote among less informed voters... Since uninformed voters are more easily persuaded, some politicians may choose to focus on marginal voters and ignore their main base of support... An additional concern under a compulsory system is that people who are uninformed (or simply do not care about the outcome of an election) may end up voting randomly. The impact of ‘random’ votes ends up being particularly detrimental because it fails to increase civic engagement and may skew election results.”
In this paper, the reasons why young people do not vote will be explored and solutions as to how to get them to vote will be proposed. According to the Center for Information and Research on Civic Learning and Engagement (CIRCLE), there are five main reasons why young people don’t vote. The graph presented uses census survey data from 2010 for citizens 18-24. The graph was broken down into two groups, those who are and are not in college. The first reason cited was being away from home or out of town, 23% of college students stated this and only 5% of people not in college stated this.
Such factors are their educational background, socioeconomic status, gender and other demographics. There will be a definite difference between a person who has an excellent academic background and a person who does not have such qualification. In the same way, socioeconomic status of a person also decides how well a person engages politically (Riedel and Sullivan, 2001). For instance, an individual who comes from a very lower class will not pay heed to political system of the country because his basic concern is to feed his children and family. His priorities will be different from a person who has all basic necessities. In the same way a middle aged person who has an adequate knowledge and experience regarding the political system of a country and a young person who is just an amateur will have significant differences of political attitudes and political efficacy. So attitudes and experiences also affect the political efficacy and ultimately the voting behaviors of the individuals (Sheerin and Celia Anne, 2007). Mass Media is one of the tools to build these attitudes and political
It is odd to look at psychological factors to answer this question, but they can be of valuable help in the search for a correct response. Giving people a vote, whether or not that vote is decisive in the adoption of certain polic...