Voter turnout in second-order elections is on a dramatic decline in many modern democracies. This article investigates how electoral participation can be substantially increased by holding multiple of these less important elections simultaneously. Leading to a relative decrease in voting costs, concurrent elections theoretically have economies of scale to the individual voter and thus should see turnout levels larger than those obtained in any stand-alone election. Leveraging as-if-random variation of local election timing in Germany, we estimate the causal effect of concurrent mayoral elections on European election turnout at around 10 percentage points. Exploiting variation in treatment intensity, we show that the magnitude of the concurrency effect is contingent upon district size and the competitiveness of the local race.
In most multidimensional spatial models, the systematic component of agent utility functions is specified as additive separable. We argue that this assumption is too restrictive, at least in the context of spatial voting in mass elections. Here, assuming separability would stipulate that voters do not care about how policy platforms combine positions on multiple policy dimensions. We present a statistical implementation of Davis, Hinich, and Ordeshook's (1970) Weighted Euclidean Distance model that allows for the estimation of the direction and magnitude of non-separability from vote choice data. We demonstrate in a Monte-Carlo experiment that conventional separable model specifications yield biased and/or unreliable estimates of the effect of policy distances on vote choice probabilities in the presence of non-separable preferences. In three empirical applications, we find voter preferences on economic and socio-cultural issues to be non-separable. If non-separability is unaccounted for, researchers run the risk of missing crucial parts of the story. The implications of our findings carry over to other fields of research: checking for non-separability is an essential part of robustness testing in empirical applications of multidimensional spatial models.
AbstractHow voters use political issues to elect political candidates is of central importance to our understanding of democratic representation. Research on voting behavior often assumes that American voters hold distinct economic and cultural issue preferences. In this research note, we point out that this does not necessarily imply that preferences for candidates’ positions on the two issue dimensions are also additively separable in voters’ decisions. Analyzing survey data on US presidential elections from 1996 to 2016, we estimate to what extent voters’ economic and socio-cultural preferences are nonseparable and find that the two general dimensions act as substitutes in their decisions. Our finding implies that voting decisions are partially structured by an underlying single dimension, as liberal deviations from a voter’s ideal point on social issues can be compensated by conservative deviations on economic issues.
Individual legislators can be important agents of political representation. However, this is contingent upon their responsiveness to constituency requests. To study this topic, an increasing number of studies use field experiments in which the researcher sends a standardized email to legislators on behalf of a constituent. In this paper, we report the results of an original field experiment of this genre with the members of the German Bundestag. Supplementing previous research, we explore whether constituency requests in which voters mention a personal vote intention (rather than a partisan vote intention) increase legislators’ responsiveness, and how this treatment relates to electoral system's incentives. We find that legislators treated with a personal vote intention were more likely to respond (67 per cent) and respond faster than those treated with a partisan vote intention (59 per cent). However, we also show that the treatment effect is moderated by electoral system incentives: it is larger for nominally‐elected legislators than for those elected via a party list. Our results suggest that electoral system's incentives matter for legislators’ responsiveness only when constituents explicitly signals an intention to cast a personal vote.
Diskriminierung aufgrund ethnischer Zugehörigkeit ist zwar mit rechtlichen und sozialen Normen unvereinbar, wird jedoch vielfach empirisch beobachtet. Die vorliegende Studie geht der Frage nach, ob ethnische Diskriminierung Bestandteil des sozialen Miteinanders in einem Kernbereich der Gesellschaft, der Politik, ist. Der Beitrag untersucht ethnische Diskriminierung in der Interaktion zwischen gewählten politischen Repräsentanten*innen, denen gemeinhin ein moralischer Vorbildcharakter zugeschrieben wird, und ihren Wählern*innen. Zudem möchten wir wissen, ob sich das Ausmaß ethnischer Diskriminierung zwischen Vertretern*innen unterschiedlicher Parteien unterscheidet. Dazu haben wir ein Korrespondenztest-Feldexperiment zur Hilfsbereitschaft von Abgeordnetenbüros des Deutschen Bundestags im Vorfeld der Bundestagswahl 2013 durchgeführt. An alle Bundestagsabgeordneten wurden Hilfeersuchen per E-Mail gerichtet, die randomisiert entweder mit einem deutsch oder türkisch klingenden Namen unterzeichnet waren. Unsere Ergebnisse zeigen, dass E-Mails mit türkisch klingenden Namen weniger häufig Antworten erhielten. Das ist ein Indiz für ethnische Diskriminierung. Zudem zeigen wir, dass sich das Diskriminierungsverhalten zwischen den Büros der Abgeordneten der im Bundestag vertretenen Parteien unterscheidet. Wir finden eine schwach ausgeprägte Diskriminierungsneigung bei Abgeordnetenbüros der Fraktion CDU/CSU, hingegen keine Anzeichen für Diskriminierung bei Abgeordnetenbüros von SPD, FDP, B90/Die Grünen und Die Linke. Nach Kontrolle des Lebensalters der Abgeordneten, der Bevölkerungsdichte des Wahlkreises, des Ausländeranteils in der Wahlkreisbevölkerung und, ob es sich um einen ost- oder westdeutschen Wahlkreis handelt, zeigen sich in den Modellen jedoch keine signifikanten Unterschiede zwischen den Fraktionen mehr.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.