Skip to main content
Log in

Promoting the Youth Vote: The Role of Informational Cues and Social Pressure

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Political Behavior Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Young voters, including college students, turnout less than older citizens—particularly in non-presidential elections. We examine two promising intervention strategies in the 2018 midterm elections: information cues and social pressure. Additionally, we consider whether voting information and social pressure to vote spread to others through social ties. Using a large-scale field experiment involving sections of a university-wide first-year writing seminar, we examine whether informational and social pressure presentations are effective strategies for increasing college student voter turnout. Furthermore, by linking each student in our study to their roommates, we assess whether there were spillover effects from the interventions. Though the treatments did not alone affect turnout, we find positive effects from classroom treatments among first-year students who were registered to vote prior to the presentations. Additionally, we find positive peer spillover effects for turnout from the social pressure treatment when the roommate of the treated student was previously registered to vote.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Our hypotheses for this study were pre-registered with Evidence in Governance and Politics (EGAP), ID 20181022AA. Hypotheses H4-H6 specify “on-campus” roommates. While there were some students in the sample with local off-campus addresses, none of them had roommates in the classes randomly assigned to treatment condition, and they were therefore not eligible to be included in the models testing roommate effects.

  2. Discussions with a director of residential life at the university revealed that first-year roommates are not randomly assigned.

  3. We do not employ a full factorial design in this instance. While such a design would allow us to infer the main effect of social pressure absent information, such a condition would be devoid of content and render the social pressure treatment meaningless, since in this context the social pressure treatment would not have made much sense without the information treatment. As such, we remain agnostic about whether social pressure may affect and thereby enhance the strength of the treatment, or whether it may carry an independent effect.

  4. A total of six student presenters were used, and variation in treatment effectiveness was assessed by accounting for potential random effects of presenter on turnout. There was significant variation among the presenters, suggesting that some were more effective than others; these results are presented in Table A8 of the online supplemental file.

  5. All analyses were also estimated using logistic regression (see Table A7 in the online supplemental file). Results were consistent across estimation approach.

  6. The registrar data coded all students as either male or female gender. Students living on campus live in rooms consisting of either all male or all female students. Most off-campus students in the sample lived in single-gender rooms as well. Four students who had a mix of female and male students living in a room were excluded from the analyses.

References

  • Addonizio, Elizabeth M. “The Fourth of July Vote: A Social Approach to Voter Mobilization and Election Day.” Ph.D. Dissertation, Department of Political Science, Yale University. 2011.

  • Aggeborn, L., Lajevardi, N., Lindgren, K.-O., Nyman, P., & Oskarsson, S. (2020). Parents, Peers, and Politics: The Long-term Effects of Vertical Social Ties. Quarterly Journal of Political Science, 15(2), 221–253.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Angrist, J. D., & Pischke, J.-S. (2008). Mostly Harmless Econometrics: An Empiricist’s Companion. New Jersey: Princeton University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Arceneaux, K., & Nickerson, D. W. (2009). Who is mobilized to vote? A re-analysis of 11 field experiments. American Journal of Political Science, 53(1), 1–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bennion, E. A., & Nickerson, D. W. (2011). The Cost of Convenience: An Experiment Showing E-Mail Outreach Decreases Voter Registration. Political Research Quarterly., 64(4), 858–869.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bennion, E. A., & Nickerson, D. W. (2016). I will register and vote, if you teach me how: A field experiment testing voter registration in college classrooms. PS: Political Science & Politics., 49(4), 867–871.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bergan, D. E. (2011). Can online videos increase turnout? A field experiment testing the effect of peer-created online videos on youth turnout. Journal of Political Marketing., 10(1), 80–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bhatti, Y., & Hansen, K. M. (2012). Leaving the nest and the social act of voting: Turnout among first-time voters. Journal of Elections, Public Opinion & Parties, 22(4), 380–406.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burgess, D., Haney, B., Snyder, M., Sullivan, J. L., & Transue, J. E. (2000). Rocking the Vote: Using Personalized Messages to Motivate Voting Among Young Adults. Public Opinion Quarterly., 64(1), 29–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, D. E. (2008). Voice in the classroom: How an open classroom climate fosters political engagement among adolescents. Political Behavior, 30(4), 437–454.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cillufo, Anthony, and Richard Fry. "An early look at the 2020 electorate." Pew Research Center. URL: https://www.pewsocialtrends. org/essay/an-early-look-atthe-2020-electorate. (January 30, 2019) (2019).

  • Coppock, A., & Green, D. P. (2016). Is voting habit forming? New evidence from experiments and regression discontinuities. American Journal of Political Science, 60(4), 1044–1062.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Costa, M., Schaffner, B. F., & Prevost, A. (2018). Walking the walk? Experiments on the effect of pledging to vote on youth turnout. PLoS ONE. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0197066.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davenport, T. C. (2010). Public accountability and political participation: Effects of a face-to-face feedback intervention on voter turnout of public housing residents. Political Behavior, 32(3), 337–368.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Djupe, P., McClurg, S., & Sokhey, A. E. (2016). The Political Consequences of Gender in Social Networks. British Journal of Political Science., 48(3), 637–658.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eagly, A. H., Karau, S. J., & Makhijani, M. G. (1995). Gender and the effectiveness of leaders: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 117(1), 125.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fraga, B. L., & Holbein, J. B. (2020). Measuring Youth and College Student Voter Turnout. Electoral Studies, 65, 102086.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Franklin, M. N. (2004). Voter turnout and the dynamics of electoral competition in established democracies since 1945. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Gerber, A. S., Green, D. P., & Larimer, C. W. (2008). Social pressure and voter turnout: Evidence from a large-scale field experiment. American Political Science Review, 102(1), 33–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gibson, Cynthia, and Peter Levine. (2003) The civic mission of schools. The Carnegie Corporation of New York and the Center for Information and Research on Civic Learning:Washington, DC

  • Glynn, C. J., Huge, M. E., & Lunney, C. A. (2009). The Influence of Perceived Social Norms on College Students’ Intention to Vote. Political Communication., 26(1), 48–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gomez, Brad T. and Matthew T. Pietryka. 2018. “Parents, Peers, and Political Participation: Social Influence among Roommates.” Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association. Boston, MA.

  • Gomila, R. (2020). Logistic or linear? Estimating causal effects of experimental treatments on binary outcomes using regression analysis. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General. https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0000920.

  • Green, D. P., & Gerber, A. S. (2019). Get Out the Vote: How to Increase Voter Turnout (4th ed.). Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grumbach, Jacob M. and Charlotte Hill. 2019. Rock the Registration: Same Day Registration Increases Turnout of Young Voters. Working Paper

  • Hart, D., & Youniss, J. (2018). Renewing Democracy in Young America. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hill, D., & Lachelier, P. (2014). Can face to face mobilization boost student voter turnout? Results of a campus field experiment. Journal of Higher Education Outreach and Engagement., 18(1), 61–88.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holbein, J. B., & Sunshine Hillygus, D. (2016). Making young voters: the impact of preregistration on youth turnout. American Journal of Political Science, 60(2), 364–382.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holbein, J. B., & Sunshine Hillygus, D. (2020). Making Young Voters: Converting Civic Attitudes into Civic Action. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Klofstad, C. A. (2007). Talk Leads to Recruitment. Political Research Quarterly, 60(2), 180–191.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klofstad, C. A. (2011). Civic Talk: Peers, Politics, and the Future of Democracy. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klofstad, C. A. (2015). Exposure to Political Discussion in College is Associated with Higher Rates of Political Participation Over Time. Political Communication., 32(2), 292–309.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lazarsfeld, P. F., & Bernard. Berelson, and Hazel Gaudet,. (1944). The People’s Choice: How the Voter Makes Up His Mind in a Presidential Campaign. Sloan and Pearce: Duell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Medenica, V. E. (2018). Millennials and Race in the 2016 Election. Journal of Race, Ethnicity and Politics, 3(1), 55–76.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaid, L. L., McKinney, M. S., & Tedesco, J. C. (2007). Introduction: Political information efficacy and young voters. American Behavioral Scientist, 50(9), 1093–1111.

  • Miller, P., Reynolds, R., & Singer, M. (2017). Mobilizing the Young Vote: Direct Mail Voter Guides in the 2015 Chicago Mayoral Election. Research & Politics., 4(4), 1–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Neundorf, A., & Smets, K. (2017). Political Socialization and the Making of Citizens. Oxford Handbooks Online. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199935307.013.98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nickerson, D. W. (2008). Is Voting Contagious? Evidence from Two Field Experiments. American Political Science Review., 102(1), 49–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Plutzer, E. (2002). “Becoming a Habitual Voter: Inertia, Resources, and Growth in Young Adulthood. American Political Science Review., 96(1), 41–56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shulman, H. C., & Levine, T. R. (2012). Exploring social norms as a group-level phenomenon: Do political participation norms exist and influence political participation on college campuses?. Journal of Communication, 62(3), 532–552.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thomas, Nancy, Inger Bergom, Ishara Casellas Connors, Prabhat Gautam, Adam Gismondi, and Alena Roshko. 2017. “Democracy Counts: A Report on U.S. College and University Student Voting.” National Study of Learning, Voting, and Engagement.

  • Ulbig, S. G., & Waggener, T. (2011). Getting Registered and Getting to the Polls: The Impact of Voter Registration Strategy and Information Provision on Turnout of College Students. PS: Political Science & Politics., 44(3), 544–551.

    Google Scholar 

  • Usry, Kay and Michael D. Cobb. 2013. “Celebrities and GOTV: An experiment to motivate voting among college students.” Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nazita Lajevardi.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

The data and replication code are publicly available https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/8KQHYP. The authors are grateful for insightful feedback provided by the anonymous reviewers. A special thanks is extended to Suchitra Webster, Renee Brown, Catalist, participants at the 2019 APSA conference, and the entire team of MSUvote.

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (docx 769 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Bergan, D.E., Carnahan, D., Lajevardi, N. et al. Promoting the Youth Vote: The Role of Informational Cues and Social Pressure. Polit Behav 44, 2027–2047 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11109-021-09686-x

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11109-021-09686-x

Keywords

Navigation