Abstract
ABSTRACTThe mechanisms behind vote recall inaccuracy are not well understood. The literature has been unable to separate inaccuracy due to the nature of the voter (such as non-attitudes) from inaccuracy due to interfering events after casting the vote (such as a change in vote intention). This paper employs event history analysis to disentangle time-invariant and time-variant explanations of recall inaccuracy. Using Dutch panel data on 20,936 respondents in 42 waves between 2010 and 2012 (and additional data collected between 2006 and 2010), we explain the likelihood of misreporting the 2010 vote during the subsequent electoral cycle. The analyses show that although both explanations play a role, voters’ general level of volatility before casting the recalled vote matters less than changes in vote intention after the vote. We conclude that accurate recall is affected mainly by events rather than the nature of voters. Our findings imply that survey measures of voting behavior could be improved by offering cues on the elections of interest.
Highlights
Because of the privacy of the voting booth, political scientists rely on respondents’ recollection of their voting behavior
A group of respondents might not have misreported their 2010 vote at the end of our observed period, but might well do this does not mean the recall error linearly increases at this rate, or that the whole set of respondents is susceptible to measurement error. 6While there might still be unobserved bias such as social desirability, any possible misestimation of recall error would bias our analyses to more conservative estimates. 7Recalled votes are measured by the question: “Which party did you vote for in the previous parliamentary elections of June 9, 2010?” 8Vote intentions are measured by the question “Which party would you vote for if parliamentary elections were held today?”
Additional respondents start to recall their voting behavior at the 2010 elections incorrectly: after 803 days, more than 25% of the respondents has had an incorrect recall at least once
Summary
Because of the privacy of the voting booth, political scientists rely on respondents’ recollection of their voting behavior. These recollections notoriously suffer from recall inaccuracy. Himmelweit, Jaeger, and Stockdale 1978; Van der Eijk and Niemöller 1979; Tourangeau, Rips, and Rasinski 2008). This has direct consequences for especially those studies that use vote recall measures that were collected months or even years after the elections took place, for instance to assess electoral volatility (over time or at different types of elections) or to explain phenomena such as (feelings of) representation or political disaffection.
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
