Demographic and Personality Traits as Factors in U. S Demographic and Personality Traits as Factors in U.S. Voter Turnout and Preference Alex Powell Political science scholars have conducted research on demographic forces in civic engagement that present theories of motivation to explain voter turnout. Using data analyses and findings from past literature I will test my claims explain lower voter turnout. Personality traits, demographic categories (e.g., age and education), mass media types, and party cues will casually factor into voter turnout. This will be explained vie three hypotheses.

Rational Studying the 1984 election (Uhlaner 1989) Finds that certain demographics, minorities and youth did not vote because they didn’t feel as if the outcome mattered. (Wary-Lake & Hart 2012). Lower education among youth cause’s a loss of interest amongst with uneducated youth significantly lower than all other age and education demographics tested in recent election years (Sondheimer & Green 2010) found that those who did not finish high school were significantly less likely to vote. In addition it was found that those who did vote were likely to continue voting (Sondheimer & Green 2010). The past research by Uhlaner 1989, Wary-Lake & Hart 2012 and Sondheimer & Green 2010 has provided information that youth, minority and uneducated voters are less likely to vote than other demographics but has not gone far enough in explaining why such trends may exist.

2012 Group Obama Romney All Voters Pct. 51% 47% RACE White 72 39 59 African-American 13 93 6 Hispanic 10 71 27 Asian 3 73 26 Other 2 58 38 AGE 18-29 19 60 37 30-44 52 45 45-64 47 51 65 & over 16 44 56 EDUCATION Some HS 64 35 HS graduate 21 48 Some college 29 49 College graduate Postgraduate study 18 55 42 Rational In my own observations as a member of the youth voting demographics and through my personal experience of never voting I have found what researchers have found through testing. That in past election year’s voter turnout among youth, uneducated and minorities are generally lower than all other voting demographics. In the 2012 presidential election the age demographic 18-29 was just 19% of vote (Roper Center). Education factored into lower turnout as well with those having some high school education a making up 3% and high school graduates, 21% of the vote in 2014 (Roper Center). In contrast some college and college graduate both made up 29% each. The gap between White and Minority voters in 2012 was significant White demographic made up 72% while African American made up 13% and Hispanic 10% (Roper Center). Contrary to this data equality among demographics such as age, education and minority groups has risen significantly (United States Census). Understanding trends of lower voter participation amongst certain voting demographics presents an intriguing task. Roper Center. (2012). 2012 Group Voting. Roper Center.http://ropercenter.cornell.edu/polls/us-elections/how-groups-voted/how-groups- voted-2012/

Wray-Lake, L., & Hart, D.. (2012). Growing Social Inequalities in Youth Civic Engagement? Evidence from the National Election Study. PS: Political Science and Politics , 45 (3), 456–461. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/41691361

Hypotheses Hypothesis 1: The greater the exposure to social media, the more unlikely people are to vote. Hypothesis 2: The stronger the cues from political party elites, the more likely they will depress voter turnout. Hypothesis 3: Personality traits and emotions (e.g. anxiousness, emotionally unstable and fear) that reflect the voting demographics youth, minorities and uneducated voting demographics can be attributed to causing lower voter turnout.

Hypotheses 1 In a recent study on how advocacy groups use social media to facilitate civic engagement it was found that Facebook was the most effective and widely used form of communication (Obar, Zube & Lampem 2012). The most telling study conducted on public opinion formation studies the effects of competing messaging from news sources. The most relevant findings conclude that when competing strong pro and strong con messaging is given to a person the two messages will cancel out and leave opinion unchanged (Chong & Druckman 2010). A rise in competing messages on social media and television from news sources has caused low level information to reach youth voters who are most active on social media. This causes youth opinion I believe to remain uninformed and undecided without the presence of highly politically sophisticated information

CHONG, D., & DRUCKMAN, J. N. (2010). Dynamic public opinion: Communication effects over time. The American Political Science Review, 104(4), 663-680. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0003055410000493

Hypotheses 2 In studying the effects of party cues on the formation of public opinion it was found that people that get political information from party cues were less likely to seek further information on an issue (Bullock 2011). The findings show that political party’s impact the level of information the public receives and provides rational to test my second theory that competing messages from party elites will depress voter turnout. The effect of framing political messaging it was found that competing frames strong pro and strong con cancel out and do not shift public opinion (Druckman, Peterson & Slothuus 2013). Reflecting on this finding it can be concluded that while controlling for party affilation when a Democratic advocates strongly con and a Republican candidate advocates strong pro on an issue a voter’s opinion of the issue and the candidate is less likely to change.

DRUCKMAN, J. N. , PETERSON, E. , & SLOTHUUS, R. (2013) DRUCKMAN, J. N., PETERSON, E., & SLOTHUUS, R. (2013). How elite partisan polarization affects public opinion formation. The American Political Science Review, 107(1), 57-79. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0003055412000500

Hypotheses 3 Using the Big Five personality traits to study which personality traits are more likely to participate in politics the study conducted by (Gerber, Buber, Doherty, Dowling, Raso & Ha 2011) finds that Agreeableness and Emotionally Unstable voters are far less likely to participate in the political process then the traits Extravert, Conscientious, Openness to Experience and Emotionally Stable A similar study conducted about personality trait and civic engagement studies the effects of emotions on voter turnout. The study tested fear, enthusiasm, anxiousness and anger as reasons people do or do not vote and found that both fear and anxiousness had a strong correlation with low voter turnout (Valentino, Brader, Groeneduck, Gregorowicz & Hutching 2011). The traits emotionally unstable and anxious can be linked to the youth and minority demographics as they are often exposed to higher stress levels. While fear can be linked to uneducated voters as they may not have the same information on a subject such as terrorism and can be more easily manipulated.

Gerber, A. S. , Huber, G. A. , Doherty, D. , Dowling, C. M. , Raso, C Gerber, A. S., Huber, G. A., Doherty, D., Dowling, C. M., Raso, C., & Ha, S. E. (2011). Personality Traits and Participation in Political Processes. The Journal of Politics, 73(3), 692-706. doi:10.1017/s0022381611000399

Reflection I believe more research is required to better understand the different factors that will cause low voter turnout among certain demographics. Other possible factors for lower turnout not studied could be historical voting regulations, percentage of registered voters in each demographics and perhaps even incarceration rate Studying the factors of low voter turnout could prove an important resource to increase civic engagement and promote a more equal and fair society. The current presidential election present an intriguing opportunity for further research to be conducted on the factors that cause low voter turnout