When is a Reminder Enough? Text Message Voter Mobilization in a European Context

Johannes Bergh,Dag Arne Christensen,Richard E Matland

doi:10.1007/s11109-019-09578-1

Johannes Bergh, Dag Arne Christensen + Show 1 more

Open Access

https://doi.org/10.1007/s11109-019-09578-1

Copy DOI

Abstract

Sending text messages reminding people to vote has only been examined as a mobilization tool in three studies, two of them done in the United States. The results from these studies are mixed. We investigate this tool’s effectiveness using a field experiment in a different context, municipal elections in Norway. We find strong mobilization effects among groups traditionally low in participation (immigrants and youth voters). Young native Norwegians show an intent-to-treat (ITT) effect of 4.58% points, foreign nationals who have recently established Norwegian residency show an ITT effect of 2.93% points, and among immigrants who have lived in Norway for 7 years or more the treatment effect is 2.7% points. Even among native Norwegian voters over 30, with a baseline turnout of 73%, text messages generate a 0.96% points increase in turnout.

Highlights

Research on the use of SMS text messages as a voter mobilization tool has led to the formulation of the Noticeable Reminder Theory (Dale and Strauss 2009)
In comparing our results with the one other test of text messages in Europe, the Danish experiments (Bhatti et al 2014, 2017), we find text messages are more effective in Norway than Denmark
Text messages are an effective tool for mobilizing voters in Norwegian local elections

Summary

Introduction

Research on the use of SMS text messages as a voter mobilization tool has led to the formulation of the Noticeable Reminder Theory (Dale and Strauss 2009). Political Behavior (2021) 43:1091–1111 frequently fail to do so because of time constraints and lack of planning To mobilize these voters, normative arguments in favor of voting are unnecessary; all they need is a simple nudge (Thaler and Sunstein 2009) such as can be provided by a text message. While voters in competitive U.S elections are often inundated with canvassers, phone calls, and mailings from the parties and independent groups, there is a more limited level of direct mobilization in the Norwegian context Another difference is the high level of turnout in Norwegian local elections (60% in the 2015 elections), as well as a high level of knowledge and awareness of the election among the general public.

Results

Discussion

Conclusion