VOTING BEHAVIOR THEORIES In the United States 1940

VOTING BEHAVIOR THEORIES In the United States, 1940 s to today

Voting behavior theories • Columbia school (1940 s, 1950 s) – Voting, The People’s Choice – Sociologists and marketing researchers – Community studies (NOT national surveys) – Emphasis on GROUPS: religion, workplace, social acquaintances – Personal influence a crucial intervening factor – Cross pressured voters choose late (if at all)

Voting behavior theories • Michigan school (1960 onward) – The American Voter – Social psychologists, political scientists – National surveys (National Election Studies begun in 1948) – Emphasis on PARTY IDENTIFICATION as a psychological attachment – Party ID begins the “funnel of causality” leading to vote choice

Why believe Michigan? • Party ID explains vote choice far better than all other variables (including political ideology) • Survey data establishes central importance of Party ID, develops connections among other explanatory variables

Concerns with Michigan model • 1950 s = political stability – 2 presidential elections between same candidates (Eisenhower, Stevenson) – Bipartisan agreement on most foreign policy issues – Major divisions are within political parties, not between political parties – What isn’t measured can’t be evaluated (group attachments)

Challenges to Michigan model • V. O. Key (1964): “Voters are not fools” – Electorate’s output reflects input; hence a more substantive campaign would reflect issuebased voting more so than in 1952, 1956 = The Responsible Electorate – Even if Party ID is central explanatory factor, voters without strong Party ID decide elections (switchers vs. standpatters)

Challenges to Michigan model • Issue voting (late 1960 s onward) – The Changing American Voter – Issues matter, effects of Party ID lessened when issue stances included in predictive models – By 1980 s, parties begin to sort better among political ideologies (hence issues predict party attachments better) – More people now vote on basis of single issues (though still not a large number, less than 20%)

Challenges to Michigan model • Rochester model (rational choice) - 1980 s onward – Retrospective Voting in American National Elections (1981) – voters reward incumbents who have benefited them, punish incumbents who have not – Explains congressional election patterns well – Campaign events aid in retrospective evaluations

Voting behavior research today • Michigan runs the National Election Study • Rational choice has strong proponents but weak evidence • Greater emphasis on “campaign effects” or the “Three C’s” – Campaign issues (what matters now) – Perceptions of candidates (personality) – Campaign events (debates, ads, scandal) • Group attachments more prominent (esp. religion)