Political Behavior

, Volume 14, Issue 2, pp 123–140 | Cite as

The determinants of turnout in presidential elections: An integrative model accounting for information

  • David Moon
Article

Abstract

This paper presents a model of turnout that extends the Riker and Ordeshook (1968) model to account for the purchase of new information for assessing outcome-contingent benefits and that seeks to integrate the various institutional, sociological, psychological, and economic factors that have been advanced to account for turnout in American presidential elections. Personal and institutional data from the 1972 and 1976 ICPSR NES Panel Study and Vote Validation Survey are used to test the model. The results suggest that a variety of factors are important in influencing the turnout decision, including the perceived difference between the candidates (in 1976), sense of social duty, sense of attachment to relevant groups, political efficacy, resource constraints, residence, and the costs of registering (in 1976). Closeness of the election also seemed to have a significant impact in 1976.

Keywords

Integrative Model Economic Factor Resource Constraint Presidential Election Panel Study 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Abramson, Paul R., and Aldrich, John H. (1982). The decline of electoral participation in America.American Political Science Review 76: 502–521.Google Scholar
  2. Abramson, Paul R., and Aldrich, John H. (1984). Reply to Hill and Cassel.American Political Science Review 78: 792–794.Google Scholar
  3. Ashenfelter, Orley, and Kelley, Stanley, Jr. (1975). Determinants of participation in presidential elections.Journal of Law and Economics 18: 695–733.Google Scholar
  4. Barry, Brian (1970).Sociologists, Economists and Democracy. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  5. Beck, Nathaniel (1975). The paradox of minimax regret.American Political Science Review 69: 918.Google Scholar
  6. Burnham, Walter D. (1987). The turnout problem. In James Reichley (ed.),Elections American Style. Washington, DC: Brookings.Google Scholar
  7. Cassel, Carol A., and Hill, David B. (1981). Explanations of turnout decline: A multivariate test.American Politics Quarterly 9: 181–195.Google Scholar
  8. Center for Political Studies (1979).The American National Election Series: 1972, 1974, and 1976 (Vols. I, II, IV, V). Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-University Consortium for Political and Social Research.Google Scholar
  9. Chamberlain, Gary, and Rothschild, Michael (1981). A note on the probability of casting a decisive vote.Journal of Economic Theory 25: 152–162.Google Scholar
  10. Dempster, A. P., Laird, N. M., and Rubin, D. B. (1977). Maximum likelihood from incomplete data via the EM algorithm.Journal of the Royal Statistical Society 37: 1–38.Google Scholar
  11. Downs, Anthony (1957).An Economic Theory of Democracy. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
  12. Ferejohn, John A., and Fiorina, Morris P. (1974). The paradox of not voting: A decision theoretic analysis.American Political Science Review 68: 525–536.Google Scholar
  13. Frank, Michael W., and Taber, Charles S. (1988). To vote or not to vote: Prospect theory applied to the downsian paradox. Presented at the Annual Meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association.Google Scholar
  14. Good, I. J., and Mayer, Lawrence S. (1975). Estimating the efficacy of a vote.Behavioral Science 20: 25–33.Google Scholar
  15. Hill, David B., and Cassel, Carol A. (1983). Comment on Abramson and Aldrich.American Political Science Review 77: 1011–1012.Google Scholar
  16. Katosh, John P., and Traugott, Michael W. 1981. The consequences of validated and self-reported voting measures.Public Opinion Quarterly 45: 519–535.Google Scholar
  17. Katosh, John P., and Traugott, Michael W. (1982). Costs and values in the calculus of voting.American Journal of Political Science 26: 361–376.Google Scholar
  18. McCubbins, Mathew D., and Page, Benjamin I. (1985). Why people vote. Proposal to the National Science Foundation.Google Scholar
  19. Miller, Nicholas B. (1986). Public choice and the theory of voting: A survey.Annual Review of Political Science 1: 1–36.Google Scholar
  20. Niemi, Richard G. (1976). Costs of voting and non-voting.Public Choice 27: 115–119.Google Scholar
  21. Owen, Guillermo, and Grofman, Bernard (1984). To vote or not to vote: The paradox of nonvoting.Public Choice 42: 311–325.Google Scholar
  22. Palfrey, Thomas R., and Rosenthal, Howard (1983). A strategic calculus of voting.Public Choice 41: 7–53.Google Scholar
  23. Petrocik, John R. (1974). An analysis of intransitivities in the index of partisan identification.Political Methodology 1: 31–47.Google Scholar
  24. Piven, Francis Fox, and Cloward, Richard A. (1988).Why Americans Don't Vote. New York: Pantheon Books.Google Scholar
  25. Powell, G. Bingham (1986). American voter turnout in comparative perspective.American Political Science Review 80: 17–43.Google Scholar
  26. Powell, Linda W. (1979). A bayesian approach to a sequential three-decision problem: Voting and the uses of information in electoral choice.Journal of Mathematical Sociology 6: 177–198.Google Scholar
  27. Riker, William H., and Ordeshook, Peter C. (1968). A theory of the calculus of voting.American Political Science Review 62: 25–42.Google Scholar
  28. Rosenstone, Steven J., and Wolfinger, Raymond E. (1978). The effect of registration laws on voter turnout.American Political Science Review 72: 22–45.Google Scholar
  29. Schwartz, Thomas (1987). Your vote counts on account of the way it's counted: An institutional solution to the paradox of not voting.Public Choice 54: 101–121.Google Scholar
  30. Squire, Peverill, Wolfinger, Raymond E., and Glass, David P. (1987). Residential mobility and voter turnout.American Political Science Review 81: 45–65.Google Scholar
  31. Stigler, George J., and Becker, Gary S. (1977). De gustibus non est disputandum.American Economic Review 67: 76–90.Google Scholar
  32. Strom, Gerald S. 1975. On the apparent paradox of participation: A new proposal.American Political Science Review 69: 908–913.Google Scholar
  33. Taber, Charles S., and Frank, Michael W. (1989). The breakdown of the big-bang theory: Evidence against consumptive models of voting. Presented at the Annual Meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association.Google Scholar
  34. Wolfinger, Raymond E., and Rosenstone, Steven J. (1980).Who Votes? New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Publishing Corporation 1992

Authors and Affiliations

  • David Moon
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Political ScienceUniversity of MiamiCoral Gables

Personalised recommendations