Acta Politica

, Volume 53, Issue 1, pp 68–97 | Cite as

Electoral volatility in Belgium (2009–2014). Is there a difference between stable and volatile voters?

  • Ruth Dassonneville
  • Dieter StiersEmail author
Original Article


Increasing voter volatility has led to a renewed research interest in determinants of party switching. While previous research has mainly focused on the characteristics of volatile voters, less is known about how stable and volatile voters decide what party to vote for. Using panel data spanning two consecutive electoral cycles in Belgium, this study starts with the confirmation of earlier findings: we show that widely used determinants like political sophistication and disaffection add only modestly to our understanding of volatility. In a next step, we examine the vote choice process of stable and volatile voters. Our results indicate that in terms of determinants of the vote choice the two groups are somewhat different. In line with theoretical expectations about the effects of stronger voter volatility, we find that party-switchers are guided more by proximity evaluations. The implication of these results is that party-switchers might actually be enriching representative democracy. We close with some observations on how this finding qualifies our theoretical understanding of increasing levels of electoral volatility in liberal democracies.


electoral volatility vote choice process Belgium fixed effects conditional logit model 


  1. Alvarez, R. M. and Nagler, J. (1998) When politics and models collide: Estimating models of multiparty elections. American Journal of Political Science, 42(1): 55–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bartels, L. M. (1999) Panel effects in the American National Election studies. Political Analysis, 8(1): 1–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Berelson, B. R., Lazarsfeld, P. F. and McPhee, W. N. (1954) Voting. A study of opinion formation in a presidential campaign. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  4. Brack, N. and Pilet, J.-B. (2010) One country, two party systems? The 2009 Belgian Regional Elections. Regional & Federal Studies, 20(4–5): 549–559.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Campbell, A., Converse, P. E., Miller, W. E. and Stokes, D. E. (1980) The American Voter (Unabridged ed.). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  6. Chen, Q., Gelman, A., Tracy, M., Norris, F. H. and Galea, S. (2015). Incorporating the sampling design in weighting adjustments for panel attrition. Statistics in medicine, 34(28): 3637–3647.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Converse, P. E. (1962) Information flow and the stability of partisan attitudes. Public Opinion Quarterly, 26(4): 578–599.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Dalton, R. J. (2013) The apartisan American: Dealignment and changing electoral politics. Washington: CQ Press.Google Scholar
  9. Dalton, R. J. and Weldon, S. A. (2005) public images of political parties: A necessary evil? West European Politics, 28(5): 931–951.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Dassonneville, R. (2012) Electoral volatility, political sophistication, trust and efficacy: A study on changes in voter preferences during the Belgian Regional Elections of 2009. Acta Politica, 47(1): 18–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Dassonneville, R. (2016) Volatile voters, short-term choices? An analysis of the vote choice determinants of stable and volatile voters in Great Britain. Journal of Elections, Public Opinion and Parties, 26(3): 273–292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Dassonneville, R., Blais, A and Dejaeghere, Y. (2015) Staying with the party, switching or exiting? A comparative analysis of determinants of party switching and abstaining. Journal of Elections, Public Opinion and Parties, 25(3): 387–405.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Dassonneville, R. and Dejaeghere, Y. (2014) Bridging the ideological space: A cross-national analysis of the distance of party switching. European Journal of Political Research, 53(3), 580–599.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Dassonneville, R., Falk Pedersen, E., Grieb, A. and Hooghe, M. (2014) Belgian Election Panel 20092014. Technical Report. Leuven: University of Leuven.Google Scholar
  15. Dassonneville, R. and Hooghe, M. (2015) Economic indicators and electoral volatility: Economic effects on electoral volatility in Western Europe, 1950–2013. Comparative European Politics in press. doi:  10.1057/cep.2015.3
  16. Deng, Y., Hillygus, D. S., Reiter, J. P., Si, Y. and Zheng, S. (2013) Handling attrition in longitudinal studies: The case for refreshment samples. Statistical Science, 28(2): 238–256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Deschouwer, K. (2012) The politics of Belgium: Governing a divided society (2nd ed.). Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Drummond, A. J. (2006) Electoral volatility and party decline in Western democracies: 1970–1995. Political Studies, 54(3): 628–647.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Gherghina, S. (2011) Does government performance matter? Electoral support for incumbents in six post-communist countries. Contemporary Politics, 17(3): 257–277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Giebler, H. and Wagner, A. (2015) Contrasting first- and second-order electoral behaviour: Determinants of individual party choice in European and German federal elections. German Politics, 24(1): 46–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Granberg, D. and Holmberg, S. (1990) The Berelson paradox reconsidered: Intention-behavior changers in US and Swedish election campaigns. Public Opinion Quarterly, 54(4): 530–550.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Greene, Z. D. and Haber, M. (2015) The consequences of appearing divided: An analysis of party evaluations and vote choice. Electoral Studies, 37: 15–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Karvonen, L. (2010) Personalization of politics: A study of parliamentary democracies. Colchester: ECPR Press.Google Scholar
  24. Kayser, M. A. and Peress, M. (2012) Benchmarking across borders: Electoral accountability and the necessity of comparison. American Political Science Review, 106(3): 661–684.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Lachat, R. (2007) A heterogeneous electorate: Political sophistication, predisposition strength, and the voting decision process. Baden-Baden: Nomos.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Lewis-Beck, M., Jacoby, W. G., Norpoth, H. and Weisberg, H. F. (2008) The American voter revisited. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Lijphart, A. (1968) Typologies of democratic systems. Comparative Political Studies, 1(1): 3–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Mainwaring, S. and Zoco, E. (2007) Political sequences and the stabilization of interparty competition. Electoral volatility in old and new democracies. Party Politics, 13(2): 155–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Marthaler, S. (2008) The paradox of the politically-sophisticated partisan: The French case. West European Politics, 31(5): 937–959.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Olson, K. and Witt, L. (2011) Are we keeping the people who used to stay? Changes in correlates of panel survey attrition over time. Social Science Research, 40(4): 1037–1050.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Pedersen, M. N. (1979) The dynamics of European party systems: Changing patterns of electoral volatility. European Journal of Political Research, 7(1): 1–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Powell, E. N. and Tucker, J. A. (2014) Revisiting electoral volatility in post-communist countries: New data, new results, and new approaches. British Journal of Political Science, 44(1): 123–147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Przeworski, A., Stokes, S. C. and Manin, B. (Eds.). (1999) Democracy, accountability and representation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  34. Rohrschneider, R. and Whitefield, S. (2012) The strain of representation: How parties represent diverse voters in Western and Eastern Europe. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Schakel, A. and Jeffery, H. (2013) Are regional elections really ‘second-order’ elections? Regional Studies, 47(3): 323–341.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Schmitt, H. and Wüst, A. (2006) The extraordinary bundestag election of 2005: The interplay of long-term trends and short-term factors. German Politics & Society, 21(1): 27–46.Google Scholar
  37. Schumpeter, J. A. (1962) Capitalism, socialism and democracy. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
  38. Singh, S. P. and Roy, J. (2014) Political knowledge, the decision calculus, and proximity voting. Electoral Studies, 34(1): 89–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Söderlund, P. (2008) Retrospective voting and electoral volatility: A nordic perspective. Scandinavian Political Studies, 31(2): 217–240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Stegmaier, M. and Lewis-Beck, M. S. (2013) Economic Voting. In Rick Valelly (Ed.), Oxford bibliographies in political science. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  41. Torcal, M. and Montero, J. R. (2006) Political disaffection in contemporary democracies: Social capital, institutions, and politics. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  42. Van der Eijk, C. and Niemöller, B. (2008) Recall accuracy and its determinants. In K. Arzheimer & J. Evans (Eds.), Electoral Behavior. Volume 4: Debates and Methodology (pp. 232–280). Los Angeles: Sage.Google Scholar
  43. van der Meer, T. W., van Elsas, E., Lubbe, R. and van der Brug, W. (2015) Are volatile voters erratic, whimsical or seriously picky? a panel study of 58 waves into the nature of electoral volatility (The Netherlands 2006–2010). Party Politics, 21(1): 100–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Van Hauwaert, S. (2015) An initial profile of the ideologically volatile voter in Europe: The multidimensional role of party attachment and the conditionality of the political system. Electoral Studies, 40: 87–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Vandecasteele, L. and Debels, A. (2007) Attrition in panel data: The effectiveness of weighting. European Sociological Review, 23(1): 81–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Walczak, A., van der Brug, W. and de Vries, C. E. (2012) Long- and short-term determinants of party preferences: Inter-generational differences in Western and East Central Europe. Electoral Studies, 31(2): 273–284.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Zelle, C. (1995) Social dealignment versus political frustration: Contrasting explanations of the floating vote in Germany. European Journal of Political Research, 27(3): 319–345.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Macmillan Publishers Ltd 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Université de MontréalMontréalCanada
  2. 2.Centre for Citizenship and Democracy, University of LeuvenLeuvenBelgium

Personalised recommendations