1. Models of Voting Behavior
Dr. Bradley Best
Asst. Professor Political Science
Buena Vista University

2. Two basic concerns: Turnout (“Who votes?”)
Key questions:
What are the characteristics and attitudes of voters vs. nonvoters?
What explains historical variation in voter turnout?
Direction (“Who votes for whom?”)
What are the characteristics and attitudes of persons voting for Republican / Democrat / Independent candidates?
What accounts for the success / failure of the Democrats / Republicans / Independents in national elections?

3. Quick Look at the Data: Who Votes? Who Votes for Whom?
Turnout
[’60-’96]
[Sex Differences]
[Census Bureau Report on Turnout in 2000 Pres. Election]
Direction
[Gender]

4. Three Models of Voting Behavior
Sociological Model (Columbia Model)
Social-Psychological Model (Michigan Model)
Economic / Rational Choice Model (Rochester Model)

5. Sociological Model Basic Idea: What you are = vote choice
Key foundational studies:
Lazarsfeld, Berelson, Gaudet (1944) The People’s Choice; Berelson, Lazarsfeld, McPhee (1954) Voting
Fixed sociological characteristics are useful predictors of vote choice
Age
Region (North, South, New England, West)
Urban / Rural
Gender
Race / Ethnicity
Occupational status
Socioeconomic status
Religious orientations

6. A few observations (Alan Abramowitz, Voice of the People (2004)):
“Race gap” is large – Whites / African Americans vote differently
American population is aging
Median age in 1970 – 28 yrs
Median age in 2000 – 35.8 yrs
Population shifts to South and West (most recent census – 11 electoral votes lost in NE, NW) – this trend favors Republicans
Increasing minority population
Lag time between immigration and voter participation
“Citizenship gap” in minority populations
“SES gap” in vote choice has narrowed
Workforce is increasingly female, white collar
“marriage gap” among women – married women more likely to vote for Republican candidate than single women
Gender gap – women still prefer Democratic candidate
Sexual preference gap – gay/lesbian voters align with Dem. party
Religious polarization – Protestant Evangelicals vote Republican

7. Social-Psychological Model
Basic Idea: Psychological processes shape vote choice
Key Foundational Study:
Campbell, Converse, Miller, and Stokes (1960) The American Voter [data from 1952, 1956 elections]
Party Identification (“Party ID”) – a “long term” factor (linked to parents ID) steering vote choice
Itself shaped by sociological factors
Relatively stable over time
Lens through which we view issues, shapes the images of candidates (short term factors)

8. A closer look at “short term” factors (may be shaped by party ID):
issue orientations (“revisionist” perspectives suggest this is more important than originally thought) – may cause a vote in direction not predicted by party ID
candidate images (qualities ascribed to candidates reflecting voter perceptions)
Evaluation of party
 Each “short term” factor is potentially shaped by the “long term” impact of Party ID; some political scientists believe that “short-term” factors also influence partisan loyalties

9. A few observations regarding Party ID:
Democrats still have advantage in terms of #s of identifiers (Yet, in recent decades, Dem advantage has eroded.)
Democrats more likely to “defect”
Demographics of Republican identifiers favors turnout
Independents less likely to vote
Rise of Republican strength in South, region of most significant population growth (11 electoral vote increase after 2000 census)
Strength of party attachment  increased probability of voting
Voters not especially sophisticated or interested, relying on party labels as cues to vote choice
Most Americans demonstrate low ideological constraint

10. Economic / Rational Choice Model
Key Foundational Studies:
Anthony Downs (1957) An Economic Theory of Democracy; V.O. Key (1966) The Responsible Electorate
Assumption that people see vote as a resource to be “spent” for something of value (i.e., a candidate choice that reflects their positions on key issues)
Assumption that voters rationally calculate most efficient use of vote choice (maximize increase in personal utility)
May also mean that voters seek to reduce the “costs” of voting
Possible consequences: search for “shortcuts” to a vote choice – e.g., single issue voting); voter registration process may discourage turnout