Do Voting Advice Applications Have an Effect on Electoral Participation and Voter Turnout? Evidence from the 2007 Swiss Federal Elections

  • Andreas Ladner
  • Joëlle Pianzola
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 6229)

Abstract

Voting Advice Applications (VAAs) render a valuable platform for tackling one of democracy’s central challenges: low voter turnout. Studies indicate that lack of information and cost-benefit considerations cause voters to abstain from voting. VAAs are online voting assistance tools which match own political preferences with those of candidates and parties in elections. By assisting voters in their decision-making process prior to casting their votes, VAAs not only rebut rational choice reasoning against voting but also narrow existing information gaps. In this paper we examine the impact of VAAs on participation and voter turnout. Specifically, we present results on how the Swiss VAA smartvote affected voter turnout in the 2007 federal elections. Our analyses suggest that smartvote does have a mobilizing capacity, especially among young voters who are usually underrepresented at polls. Moreover, the study demonstrates how VAAs such as smartvote do affect citizen’s propensity to deal with politics in general.

Keywords

e-democracy voter turnout electoral participation Voting Advice Applications (VAAs) 

References

  1. 1.
    Lijphart, A.: Democracy’s Unresolved Dilemma. The American Political Science Review 91(1), 1–14 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Kriesi, H.: Direct Democratic Choice. The Swiss Experience. Lexington Books, Oxford (2005)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Oser, F., Biedermann, H.: Jugend ohne Politik. Ergebnisse der IEA Studie zu Politischem Wissen, Demokratieverständnis und Gesellschaftlichem Engagement von Jugendlichen in der Schweiz im Vergleich mit 27 anderen Ländern. Zürich (2003)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Dalton, R.J.: Citizen Politics. Public Opinion and Political Parties in Advanced Industrial Democracies. CQ Press, Washington (2006)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Lutz, G.: Low Turnout in Direct Democracy. Electoral Studies 26, 624–632 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Norris, P.: Will New Technology Boost Turnout? Evaluating Experiments in UK Local Elections. In: Kersting, N., Baldersheim, H. (eds.) Electronic Voting and Democracy, New York, pp. 193–225 (2004)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Norris, P.: E-Voting as the Magic Ballot for European Parliamentary Elections? Evaluating E-Voting in the Light of Experiments in UK Local Elections. In: Trechsel, A.H., Mendez, F. (eds.) The European Union and E-Voting. Addressing the European Parliament’s Internet Voting Challenge, London, pp. 60–90 (2004)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Trechsel, A.H.: Inclusiveness of Old and New Forms of Citizens’ Electoral Participation. Representation 43(2), 111–121 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Norris, P.: Preaching to the Converted? Pluralism, Participation and Party Websites. Party Politics 9(1), 21–45 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Jeitziner, B.: Wahlen im Internetzeitalter. Informationsvermittler als politische Berater von Wählern und Politikern. In: Schaltegger, C.A., Schaltegger, S.C. (eds.) Perspektiven der Wirtschaftspolitik. Festschrift zum 65. Geburtstag von Prof. Dr. René L. Frey, pp. 47–64. vdf Hochschulverlag, Zürich (2004)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Leuchinger, S., Rosinger, M., Stutz, A.: The Impact of Postal Voting on Participation: Evidence for Switzerland. Swiss Political Science Review 13(2), 167–202 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Fivaz, J., Schwarz, D.: Nailing the Pudding to the Wall – E-Democracy as Catalyst for Transparency and Accountability. Paper Presented at the International Conference on Direct Democracy in Latin America, March 14-15, Buenos Aires, Argentina (2007)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Walgrave, S., van Aelst, P., Nuytemans, M.: Do the Vote Test: The Electoral Effects of a Popular Vote Advice Application at the 2004 Belgian Elections. Acta Politica 43(1), 50–70 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Bühlmann, M., Freitag, M., Vatter, A.: Die Schweigende Mehrheit. Eine Typologie der Schweizer Nichtwählerschaft. In: Sciarini, P., Hardmeier, S., Vatter, A. (eds.) Schweizer Wahlen 1999, Bern, pp. 27–58 (2003)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Fivaz, J.: Impact of “smart-voting” on Political Participation. Working Paper Presented at the Civic Education and Political Participation Workshop at the Université de Montréal, June 17-19 2008, Montreal, Canada (2008)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Lutz, G.: Eidgenössische Wahlen 2007. Wahlteilnahme und Wahlentscheid. Lausanne (2008)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Ruusuvirta, O., Rosema, M.: Do Online Vote Selectors Influence Electoral Participation and the Direction of the Vote? Paper Presented at the ECPR General Conference, September 13-12 , Potsdam, Germany (2009)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Mykkänen, J., Moring, T.: Dealigned Politics Comes of Age? The Effects of Online Candidate Selectors on Finnish Voters. Paper Presented at the Conference of Politics on the Internet: New Forms of Media for Political Action, November 25 , Tampere (2006)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Marschall, S.: Idee und Wirkung des Wahl-O-Mat. Aus Politik und Zeitgeschichte (APuZ) 51-52, 41–46 (2005)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Ladner, A., Felder, G., Fivaz, J.: Are Voting Advice Applications (VAAs) more than Toys? First Findings on Impact and Accountability of VAAs. IDHEAP Working Paper 2/2008, Lausanne (2008)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Carlson, T., Strandberg, K.: The 2004 European Parliament Election on the Web: Finnish Actor Strategies and Voter Responses. Information Polity 10(3-4), 189–204 (2005)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Downs, A.: An Economic Theory of Democracy. Harper and Row, New York (1957)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Palfrey, T.R., Poole, K.T.: The Relationship between Information, Ideology and Voting Behavior. American Journal of Political Science 31(3), 511–530 (1987)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Delli Carpini, M.X., Keeter, S.: What Americans Know about Politics and Why It Matters. Yale University Press, New Haven (1996)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Kirchgässner, G., Feld, L.P., Savioz, M.R.: Die Direkte Demokratie. Modern, Erfolgreich, Entwicklungs- und Exportfähig. Verlag Franz Vahlen, München (1999)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Dalton, R.J.: Democratic Challenges – Democratic Choices. The Erosion of Political Support in Advanced Industrial Democracies, Oxford (2007)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Ladner, A., Felder, G., Schädel, L.: From E-voting to smart-voting. E-Tools in and for Elections and Direct Democracy in Switzerland. Paper Presented at the Conference ‘Direct Democracy in and Around Europe: Integration, Innovation, Illusion, and Ideology’ at the Center for Democracy Aarau, October 3 (2008)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© IFIP International Federation for Information Processing 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Andreas Ladner
    • 1
  • Joëlle Pianzola
    • 1
  1. 1.Institutional Policies, IDHEAP LausanneChavannes-près-Renens

Personalised recommendations