Issue Voting Research Articles

Ain'T Misbehavin

Members of the House of Representatives appear to be extremely concerned about the potential effects of issue voting on their reelection drives while Senators do not seem similarly worried. Are these views realistic? Using data from the 1978 Center for Political Studies National Election Study, this article develops a model of the maximum amount of issue voting that can be found in congressional elections. For the House and Senate, issue positions of the voter and attributed stands to the Democratic and Republican candidates are employed on six issues: (1) federal job guarantee, (2) rights of the accused, (3) rights of minorities, (4) federal medical insurance, (5) womens' roles, and (6) liberalism-conservatism. The maximum issue voting on these issues is found to be potentially damaging, but more threatening to Senators than to House members because the latter are more electorally secure in the first place. More substantial degrees of policy voting are found for the House on the most important national problem and the most important issue in the campaign (both as identified by the respondent); however, the former issues favor the Democrats overall while the latter help Republican candidates and effectively cancel each other out at least in national aggregates. The conclusion is that Senators have more to fear from issue voting than do House members.

The issue in issue voting

Abstract The principal problem in issue voting concerns the direction of causality. The voter's thinking on an issue may be the “cause “of his voting for a particular party. Conversely, the voter's identification with a party may shape his thinking on an issue. Or it is possible that the relation between party identification and opinion on issues is spurious. The methods of analysis suggested by Blau and Goodman are combined to provide a number of tests of the principal hypotheses. An antecedent variable was located and 15 tests undertaken of the relations between variables. The inference is drawn that in the political process, opinions on an issue are best regarded as a product rather than as a cause. This is most likely to be the case when opinions are tested during the course of an election campaign.

The Prospects for Issue-Voting in Contemporary Congressional Elections

A number of research reports on presidential elections have found evidence for increased issue voting in recent years. This article extends the concern with such possible attitudinal and behavioral changes to midterm Congressional elections. To do so, we focus on one particular requirement for issue voting—the existence of accurate knowledge of candidates' policy positions. With data for 1978, we examine the existence and accuracy of constituents' perceptions of their own representative's positions in five issue domains and on a generalized liberal-conservative dimension. We also consider the quality of representation in these policy areas by comparing representatives' voting with constituents' personal policy preferences. The evidence indicates generally poor knowledge of candidates, but also that both candidates and citizens contribute to this situation. Similarly, there is only modest convergence between the preferences of individual citizens and their representative's voting behavior in Congress on the issues tested.

Variability in Electoral Behavior: The 1960, 1968, and 1976 Elections

By estimating path coefficients for voting behavior in the 1960, 1968, and 1976 elections, this research both fills in missing elections in Schulman and Pomper's (1975) original research on variability in electoral behavior and extends the analysis to include the 1976 election. Viewing all six elections from 1956 to 1976, it becomes obvious that issue voting was abnormally high in the 1964 and 1972 elections. Nonetheless, even excluding these two elections, comparison of the total direct and indirect effects on voter choices of issues, partisanship, and candidate evaluations shows that issues have been gaining importance, partisanship losing importance, and candidate evaluations holding steady.

The Two Faces of Issue Voting

Both implicit democratic norms and the reconstructions provided by theorists of rational choice suggest that issue voters are more sophisticated–educated, informed, and active in politics–than other voters. But some issues are clearly more difficult than others, and the voters who respond to “hard” and “easy” issues, respectively, are assumed to differ in kind. We propose the hypothesis that “easy-issue” voters are no more sophisticated than non-issue voters, and this is found to be the case. The findings suggest a reevaluation of the import of rising and falling levels of issue voting and suggest a prominent role for “easy” issues in electoral realignments.

Mass Media Use, Issue Knowledge and Political Involvement

RECENT studies report an increase in mass political sophistication, as indicated by attitudinal consistency and issue voting, not only among the well educated, but among the less educated and disinterested as well (e.g., Nie et al., 1976; Niemi and Weisberg, 1976).1 This finding, together with the observation that the influence of traditional political socialization agents has eroded (Jennings and Niemi, 1975), point to the mass media as important influences on voters as sources of information and as guides for affective and behavioral orientations. The hypothesized central role of the mass media in political socialization2 has spawned a number of recent studies reevaluating the effects of mass media use on the electorate (e.g., Chaffee, 1977; Kraus and Davis, 1976). Typically, recursive models are used, predicting that the direction of causality is from mass media use to political socialization. This report examines the relationships between mass media use and interpersonal discussion, and between issue knowledge and campaign

Levels of Issue Voting

In the last five years studies of the American electorate have found some evidence that voters have adopted more of the attributes that mark the informed citizen. Increasing concern with issues and a greater correlation between issues and the vote have cheered observers who were always uneasy with what appeared to be a blind commitment to voting for the party. However, other recent studies have indicated that candidates also play a role in the level of issue voting which characterizes any election. These data support an early argument that candidates are a critical variable for the level of issue voting in any election; and that higher levels of issue voting since 1964 may be a reflection of different candidates rather than greater ideological concern among voters. This article examines the latter possibility. The article presents a typology of elections based on the nature of the candidate-pair; it documents the similarity of elections with like candidate-pairs but unlike electorates; it attempts a tentative assessment of the impact of candidate pairs on the individual voter level; and it applies the hypothesis about candidate-pairing effects to the 1976 election.

Parties and Candidates in 1972: Objects of Issue Voting

Parties and Candidates in 1972: Objects of Issue Voting

Parties and Candidates in 1972: Objects of Issue Voting

Parties and Candidates in 1972: Objects of Issue Voting

Issue Voting

This paper argues that six conditions must be met to conclude that issue voting exists: (1) candidates must take different positions on the issues of the day; (2) the campaign issues must be salient to the voter; (3) voters must have a position on the issue; (4) voters must accurately perceive candidate positions; (5) issue-based candidate evaluations must be consistent with vote intention; and (6) vote intention must be based on a previously established issue evaluation not vice versa. This study estimates the number of voters who were able to meet these conditions for issue voting during the 1972 presidential election campaign.

The formation and structure of political belief systems

Do large numbers of people possess the ability to relate to political events in a systematic way? Is this ability shown in the formation of relatively coherent systems of beliefs about politics? To deal with these questions, this article develops and tests a model of the cognitive process by which individuals form and organize beliefs about politics. The model explains the formation of political belief systems and successfully predicts their structure. The model also provides an integrative focus for the literature on political rationality and “issue voting,” and on the relationship between political attitude and political behavior.

Center for Political Studies National Election Studies

Late May, 1979, has been targeted as the release date of data from a pre-presidential pilot study conducted under the supervision of its Board of Overseers by the Center for Political Studies, University of Michigan. The pilot study is a direct outgrowth of a number of research conferences—on issue voting, party identification and response to leadership—held by the Board during the academic year of 1977–78. The conferences brought together some 60 scholars from across the nation in several locations for the purpose of advising the Board and the Center in preparation for the 1980 presidential study made possible by a long-term national resource grant from the National Science Foundation (for earlier reports on these conferences, seePS, Spring, 1978, pp. 240–242, andPS, Summer, 1978, pp. 342–343). The pilot study was recommended by a smaller group of scholars assembled in Ann Arbor in August, 1978, for the purpose of integrating the many suggestions for future electoral and related research received from the conference participants and from an equal number of other scholars who, because of limited resources, could not be invited to the conferences (for a report on the August workshop, seePS, Fall, 1978, pp. 504–505).

Center for Political Studies National Election Studies

Late May, 1979, has been targeted as the release date of data from a pre-presidential pilot study conducted under the supervision of its Board of Overseers by the Center for Political Studies, University of Michigan. The pilot study is a direct outgrowth of a number of research conferences—on issue voting, party identification and response to leadership—held by the Board during the academic year of 1977–78. The conferences brought together some 60 scholars from across the nation in several locations for the purpose of advising the Board and the Center in preparation for the 1980 presidential study made possible by a long-term national resource grant from the National Science Foundation (for earlier reports on these conferences, see PS, Spring, 1978, pp. 240–242, and PS, Summer, 1978, pp. 342–343). The pilot study was recommended by a smaller group of scholars assembled in Ann Arbor in August, 1978, for the purpose of integrating the many suggestions for future electoral and related research received from the conference participants and from an equal number of other scholars who, because of limited resources, could not be invited to the conferences (for a report on the August workshop, see PS, Fall, 1978, pp. 504–505).

Issue Voting and Party Realignment

Issue Voting and Party Realignment

Book Review: Issue Voting and Party Realignment. By DONALD S. STRONG. (University: the University of Alabama Press, 1977. Pp. 110. $6.50, $2.75.)

Book Review: Issue Voting and Party Realignment. By DONALD S. STRONG. (University: the University of Alabama Press, 1977. Pp. 110. $6.50, $2.75.)

Policy Voting in Britain: The Colored Immigration Issue in the 1964, 1966, and 1970 General Elections

Several studies in recent years have examined the question of mass issue voting in the United States and have found that people vote more frequently on the basis of policy questions than has heretofore been thought. It would seem to be useful for the study of comparative politics to explore mass policy voting in other democratic countries. The colored immigration issue in Britain is a particularly appropriate one to examine because of the controversy surrounding its impact on voting behavior, especially in the 1970 election. Are the policy preferences of the electorate related to their voting behavior? This question is examined longitudinally through a secondary analysis of the Butler-Stokes election surveys of 1964,1966, and 1970 for England.After utilizing controls for a large number of variables, one finds that theimmigration issue had no significant impact on electoral behavior in 1964 and 1966. In the 1970 election, however, the Conservatives gained an estimated increment of 6.7 percent in votes because many people perceived them to be the party more likely to keep immigrants out and voted in accordance with that perception. This impact can be attributed to Enoch Powell's associating the Conservative party with restrictive immigration control in the public mind.

An Outline for a Model of Party Choice

This article is a synthetic effort. It attempts to mold the issue voter of traditional democratic theory and choice models with the nature of the times and partisan voters of empirical voting studies. The vehicle for this attempted synthesis is a voter decision rule more complex, more inclusive, and perhaps less rational than others previously suggested. After motivating and developing the formal representation of the decision rule, a variety of empirical findings about voting behavior are reexamined in light of the rule. Some reinterpretations result, particularly in the case of party identification. This article takes a first step toward formalizing a number of ideas about American voting behavior. Specifically, I will sketch a model which integrates the familiar notions of party identification, retrospective voting, and issue voting into a single decision rule. As intimated, the ideas in this paper are not new ones. But the process of formalizing familiar notions may force a greater degree of precision in our thinking, and perhaps make evident the full implications of the ways we think about voting behavior (see Fiorina, 1975). The article divides into two sections. In the first I outline a model of the individual voting decision, proceeding from the simplest conception of electoral choice to the most complex. This section is largely abstract. In the second section of the paper I attempt to show that the model provides an explanation for a variety of empirical findings which emerge from the research of specialists in voting behavior. Such findings include low correlations between specific issue positions and the ultimate vote decision, the general importance of party ID for voting behavior and why it may vary over time, the strengthening of party ID with political experience in some societies but not in others, incumbency advantages, the importance of the personal qualities of candidates for office, and others.

From Confusion to Confusion: Issues and the American Voter (1956–1972)

The authors of the American Voter concluded that the distribution of opinions on current issues was not very important for explaining the vote of the large bulk of the American electorate. Recent studies purporting to demonstrate the increasing prevalence of issue voting in the 1960s and early 1970s fail to present evidence to satisfy the criteria for issue voting upon which the conclusions of the American Voter were based. Worse yet, the evidence of these newer studies fails to satisfy even the studies' own alternative criteria for issue voting. The apparent “increases” in issue voting prove to be largely artifacts of the measures employed or misinterpretations of the evidence adduced. When it comes to translating his issue preferences into voting choices, the average voter remains as confused as ever

From Confusion to Confusion: Issues and the American Voter (1956–1972)

The authors of the American Voter concluded that the distribution of opinions on current issues was not very important for explaining the vote of the large bulk of the American electorate. Recent studies purporting to demonstrate the increasing prevalence of issue voting in the 1960s and early 1970s fail to present evidence to satisfy the criteria for issue voting upon which the conclusions of the American Voter were based. Worse yet, the evidence of these newer studies fails to satisfy even the studies' own alternative criteria for issue voting. The apparent “increases” in issue voting prove to be largely artifacts of the measures employed or misinterpretations of the evidence adduced. When it comes to translating his issue preferences into voting choices, the average voter remains as confused as ever

A Majority Party in Disarray: Policy Polarization in the 1972 Election

The Center for Political Studies' 1972 presidential election survey was used to investigate the role that issue voting, ideology, candidate assessments, and partisan defections played in the Republican landslide of that year. An analysis of issue attitudes revealed a deep policy schism among the Democrats: McGovern supporters preferred liberal policy alternatives while Nixon Democrats favored distinctly conservative issue positions. Interitem correlations among various issues and a liberal-conservative scale showed the voters to have substantial attitude consistency. A normal-vote analysis of these issues demonstrated that the Vietnam war and social issue domains contributed more significantly to the explanation of the vote than did cultural or economic issues. The candidates were clearly perceived as having taken opposing issue positions, with Nixon's position the more preferred by a majority of the population. A proximity measure, computed as the discrepancy between perceived candidate issue position and the voter's policy preference, proved to be a better predictor of the vote decision than the voter's own issue position taken alone. Analyses of candidate assessments showed that McGovern was not a personally appealing candidate—a factor that allowed issue differences to gain maximal importance. The sharp intraparty polarization of Democrats over policy alternatives, a change in the educational composition of the electorate, a decrease in partisan identification, and a growth in partisan defection combined to suppress the impact of party identification as a determinant of the vote decision. It was concluded that the 1972 presidential race could be labeled “ideological” by comparison with past elections.