2010
DOI: 10.1007/s11109-010-9124-y
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Is There Backlash to Social Pressure? A Large-scale Field Experiment on Voter Mobilization

Abstract: Using social pressure to mobilize voters has generated impressive increases in turnout (Gerber et al. Am Polit Sci Rev 102:33-48, 2008). However, voters may have negative reactions to social pressure treatments that reduce their effectiveness. Social psychologists have observed this 'reactance' to persuasive pressure about other behavior, but it has been overlooked in voter mobilization. Using a large-scale field experiment, we find treatments designed to reduce reactance are just as effective as heavy-handed … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

3
49
0

Year Published

2010
2010
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 70 publications
(52 citation statements)
references
References 43 publications
(55 reference statements)
3
49
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Telling registered voters that they were being studied, by contrast, produced much weaker effects. These results suggest that social pressure, and not merely being observed, has the greatest effect, a finding that has since been replicated by several follow-up experiments , Mann, 2010Panagopoulos, 2010Panagopoulos, , 2011Sinclair, McConnell, & Green, 2012) In sum, effective e-mail mobilization is far from guaranteed, but we expect the likelihood of success to increase with personalization and explicit social pressure. We further predict that the social pressure message will have a greater effect than personalization alone.…”
Section: Personalization and Social Pressure As Mobilization Tacticssupporting
confidence: 52%
“…Telling registered voters that they were being studied, by contrast, produced much weaker effects. These results suggest that social pressure, and not merely being observed, has the greatest effect, a finding that has since been replicated by several follow-up experiments , Mann, 2010Panagopoulos, 2010Panagopoulos, , 2011Sinclair, McConnell, & Green, 2012) In sum, effective e-mail mobilization is far from guaranteed, but we expect the likelihood of success to increase with personalization and explicit social pressure. We further predict that the social pressure message will have a greater effect than personalization alone.…”
Section: Personalization and Social Pressure As Mobilization Tacticssupporting
confidence: 52%
“…First, switching from the social pressure of presenting people with their voting records to using messages with consistent norms would dramatically simplify the distribution process as there would be no need to collect voting records for every individual you wish to contact. Second, using social pressure entails the danger of psychological reactance or backlash, in which message targets express aggression or hostility toward the source of a message (Mann 2010;Matland and Murray 2013;Murray and Matland, forthcoming). There is little danger of reactance with a consistent-norms message.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…And while telephone appeals by professional phone banks-suffering from a stiff, scripted delivery-have no effect (Gerber and Green 2000a), volunteer phone calls (making either partisan or generic GOTV appeals) serve to increase turnout by 3 or 4% points (Nickerson 2005(Nickerson , 2006. Nontraditional, personalized appeals to both civic duty and threats to make public a voter's performance likewise have been demonstrated to have powerful motivating effects (Gerber et al 2008;Panagopoulos 2010;Mann 2010).…”
Section: Campaign Contact and Voter Turnoutmentioning
confidence: 99%