Voting behavior

Last updated

Voting behavior refers to how people decide how to vote. [1] This decision is shaped by a complex interplay between an individual voter's attitudes as well as social factors. [1] Voter attitudes include characteristics such as ideological predisposition, party identity, degree of satisfaction with the existing government, public policy leanings, and feelings about a candidate's personality traits. [1] Social factors include race, religion and degree of religiosity, social and economic class, educational level, regional characteristics, and gender. [1] The degree to which a person identifies with a political party influences voting behavior, [2] as does social identity. [3] Voter decision-making is not a purely rational endeavor but rather is profoundly influenced by personal and social biases and deeply held beliefs [4] as well as characteristics such as personality, memory, emotions, and other psychological factors. [5] [6] Voting advice applications [7] and avoidance of wasted votes through strategic voting [8] can impact voting behavior.

Contents

Types

Citizens are not blank slates- they have pre existing political habits that affect how likely they are to vote, and pre existing political identities that affect whether they will vote for Democratic or Republican candidates. [9] Voter behavior is often influenced by voter loyalty. [10] There is a correlation between voter satisfaction with what a political party has achieved and dealt with a situation and voters' intention of voting for the same party again. [10] Thus, if there is high voter satisfaction with how the political party performed, then the likelihood of a reoccurring vote in the next election is high. [10] Additionally, the information supplied to the voter is significant in understanding voting behavior. The information provided to the voter, not only influences who to vote for, but if they are intending too at all. [11]

Influence of cleavages

Three cleavage-based voting factors, or individual differences impacting voting behavior, focused on in existing research are religion, class, and gender. [12] In recent years, voting cleavage has shifted from concerns of Protestant vs Catholic religions to have a larger focus on religious vs non-religious leanings. [12] Research shows that citizens vote for the candidate that they believe is most compatible with their moral convictions and religious values. [13] Traditional conceptions of class voting dictate a working-class preference towards left-leaning parties and middle-class preference for right-leaning parties. The influences of class voting is reliant on political environment and location, many nations observe the opposite preferences. [14] [12]

Many cleavage-based voting behaviors are interconnected and frequently build on each other. [12] These factors also tend to hold different levels of weight in different countries, based on their political environment, meaning that there is no universal explanation for voting cleavage in all democratic countries. [12] Each factor has a different level of importance and influence on one's vote dependent on the country one is voting in. [12]

Election dependency

Research following the Cypriot Referendum of 2004 identified four distinct voting behaviors depending on the election type. [15] Citizens use different decision criteria if they are called to exercise their right to vote in presidential, legislative, local elections or in a referendum. [15]

In national elections, voters usually vote based on their political ideologies. [15] In local and regional elections, voters tend to vote for those who seem more capable to contribute to their area. [15] Voting behavior for referendums differs slightly, as people vote for or against a clearly defined policy. [15]

Partisanship

2016 Election in Japan; A 1960 study of postwar Japan found that citizens living in urban areas were more likely to be supportive of socialist or progressive parties, while citizens living in rural areas were favorable of conservative parties. Election in Japan2016 Summer.jpg
2016 Election in Japan; A 1960 study of postwar Japan found that citizens living in urban areas were more likely to be supportive of socialist or progressive parties, while citizens living in rural areas were favorable of conservative parties.

Partisan voting is also an important motive behind an individual's vote and can influence voting behavior. [17] A 2000 research study on partisanship voting in the United States found evidence that partisan voting has a large effect on voting behavior. [17] However, partisan voting has a larger effect on national elections, such as a presidential election, than it does on congressional elections. [17] Furthermore, there is also a distinction of partisan voting behavior relative to a voter's age and education. Studies show that individuals with more educational attainment are more likely to vote. [18] Those over fifty years old and those without a high school diploma are more likely to vote based on partisan loyalty. [19] [17] Research also suggests that those with higher levels of education may prefer liberal policies. [20] Additionally, the voting behavior tendencies of different groups may shift over time; for example, in the United States, voters with college degrees have shifted significantly toward Democratic Party candidates over the past three decades. [21] This research is based on the United States and has not been confirmed to accurately predict voting patterns in other democracies. [17]

Research has shown that income is a significant factor that influences voting decision- higher income individuals are more likely to vote for a conservative party [22] Conversely, lower income individuals may support left leaning parties as they may perceive these policies to be aligned with reducing social disparity. [23]

A 1960 study of Postwar Japan found that citizens living in urban areas were more likely to be supportive of socialist or progressive parties, while citizens living in rural areas were favorable of conservative parties. [16]

Voters have also been shown to be affected by coalition and alliance politics, and whether such coalitions form before or after an election. [24] In these cases, voters can be swayed by feelings on coalition partners when considering their feelings toward their preferred political party. [24]

Gender differences

In 2016, a higher percentage of White women in the United States voted more for Donald Trump over Hillary Clinton Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton during United States presidential election 2016.jpg
In 2016, a higher percentage of White women in the United States voted more for Donald Trump over Hillary Clinton

Gender is an important factor to consider when making inferences regarding voting behavior. Gender often interacts with factors such as region, race, occupational differences, age, ethnicity, educational level, and other characteristics to produce a distinct multiplicative effect on voting behavior. [26] Much of the research on gender differences in voting behavior has centered on the gender gap and party realignment of women in the United States towards the Democratic Party in the 1980s. [27] More recent research focusing on the partisan gender gap in the United States suggests that this gender gap is actually a race gap, as White women in the U.S. have consistently been supporters of the Republican Party and were more likely to vote for Donald Trump over Hillary Clinton in the 2016 Presidential Election. [25] Research shows that women's political attitudes may align with more progressive and left leaning policies- women may prioritize issues such as healthcare, education, and gender equality. [28] Conversely, men may value right leaning parties as they may prioritize issues such as national security, economic growth, and traditional values that the conservative party upholds. [29] More recent and forthcoming research expands this focus to a global perspective, using cross-national perceptions of gender differences in voting behavior to make predictions that factor in the role of gender in voting decisions. [26]

Historical and global perspective

Afghan women voting in the 2004 Presidential Election; under Taliban rule, women are not allowed to travel more than 72 kilometers without a male chaperone which creates a voting obstacle. Women voting afghanistan 2004 usaid.jpg
Afghan women voting in the 2004 Presidential Election; under Taliban rule, women are not allowed to travel more than 72 kilometers without a male chaperone which creates a voting obstacle.

In the modern era, New Zealand was the first nation to grant women the legal right to vote, in 1893. [31] The vast majority of nations officially granted women the right to vote over the past century, though many women were prevented from voting for decades, such as Black women in many regions of the United States. prior to the 1960s. [31] As of 2023, virtually all nations other than Vatican City officially grant women the legal right to vote, though significant barriers exist to women's suffrage in many places that can make casting a ballot impossible or near impossible. [31] Examples include Afghanistan, where women are not allowed to travel more than 72 kilometers without a male chaperone, [30] and parts of Kenya, where many women could not vote in recent elections due to election-related sexual violence. [32] [33]

Research on gender differences in voting has historically focused on economically advanced, western-style democracies, though there is a growing body of research on women's voting preferences in lower income nations. [34] Research has demonstrated that gender differences in voting exist worldwide. [26] The cause of this gender gap often varies by country and region. [26] Frequently utilized explanations for gender gaps in voting are socioeconomic factors, situational constraints for women, and differences in political priorities. [26] Studies indicate that the way these factors interact with voting behavior depends on location, cultural norms, literacy level, [35] lived experience, and other facets of identity including race, ethnicity, and age. [26] It is thus important to employ an intersectional lens - meaning, one in which race, ethnicity, economic status, sexual identity, educational status, and other factors are considered -  and explore gender within the context of these other factors to understand voting behavior more fully. [26]

Gendered influence on sources of individual voting behavior

Influences on candidate choice have been linked to three main influences on voting behavior. [1] These influences include, but are not limited to, issue and public policy beliefs, perceptions of government performance, and personal evaluation of candidate characteristics. [1] These factors are influenced by a range of compounding factors including gender. [26]

Issue and public policy beliefs

Voters must hold opinions on the subject and recognize differences between the candidates on it in order for it to influence their choice of candidate. [36] Oftentimes, voters will hold viewpoints that are too unstable to serve as a benchmark for comparing the candidates, while others won't detect any significant distinctions between them on the subject. [37] Other voters will have firm opinions and distinct perceptions of candidate differences, specifically when the candidates directly indicate their distinctions. [36] Relating back to voting behavior, the crucial point is not whether voters have a specific candidate or policy choice, but rather how much they differentiate between candidates on policy matters and decide who to vote for on that basis. [38]

Partisan ideology influences these views on policy. In the United States, ideology affects how voters cast their ballots in presidential elections based on their beliefs on certain policy concerns. Another method of influence is party identification, which working with ideology may also shape the ways in which voters perceive policy. [36]

Gender gap in partisan preferences
Former U.K. Prime Minister David Cameron at the London Summit on Family Planning; the U.K Conservative Party under David Cameron between 1997 and 2010, had more success winning votes from younger women as they addressed issues like government funded family planning. Prime Minister David Cameron, speaking at the London Summit on Family Planning (7554893808).jpg
Former U.K. Prime Minister David Cameron at the London Summit on Family Planning; the U.K Conservative Party under David Cameron between 1997 and 2010, had more success winning votes from younger women as they addressed issues like government funded family planning.

There is mixed research regarding whether or not a gender gap in partisan preferences exists, and if it does exist to what extent. [40] Research that affirms the existence of this gap emphasizes that younger women in particular are more likely to support progressive left-leaning candidates than men. [41] The cause of this shift is still being explored, but one prevalent theory holds that gendered differences in voting behavior can at least in part be attributed to the growing presence of women in the workforce due to structural reform, improved accessibility of women to the education system, the questioning of traditional gender roles, [42] and the disproportionate amount of unpaid caregiving work that women perform. [39] These developments have led younger women to be more supportive of left-leaning political parties that tend to prioritize issues especially salient to women. [41]

A relevant example to this point are right-leaning parties that have addressed relevant economic issues such as state-funded childcare, such as the U.K Conservative Party under David Cameron between 1997 and 2010, have since had more success winning votes from younger women. [39]

Perceptions of government performance

Voting behavior is significantly influenced by retrospective assessments of government performance, which should be differentiated from the influence of policy issues. [43] Different opinions on what the government ought to do are involved in policy concerns, which are prospective or based on what will happen. Performance assessments, which are retrospective, contain differences regarding how effectively the government has performed. [44] [45]

Legislator and voter gender can affect voter perceptions of government performance. [46] A 2019 study surveying a nationally representative sample of United States citizens, found that women's equal representation in political-decision-making bodies builds trust and broad approval of these bodies across policy outcomes and areas. [46]

Personal evaluations of candidates

Voters frequently weigh candidates’ personal qualities such as experience, integrity, morals, compassion, competence, and leadership potential. [47] [37]

These established opinions of candidates' traits are developed in addition to how they view them in terms of political and policy issues, and these judgments have a significant impact on voting decisions. [47] The candidates' perceived competence, concern, sincerity, dependability, and leadership ability have been found to be one crucial feature of their personal character. [47] Which qualities matter and how these perceptions are formed is intertwined with a variety of identity factors including gender. [48] [49]

Gender bias in voting

Historically, political power has been disproportionately held by men. [50] This unrepresentative balance is still reflected today with the vast majority of the highest political offices occupied by men. This trend holds even in democracies where political positions are technically accessible to all genders. [50] This disparity is a product of a multitude of factors, but some suggest that the gender bias of voters plays a role in maintaining this political gender gap. [48]

Physical characteristics of political candidates impact voter bias in a uniquely gendered way. [48] A study from 2008 found that men are more likely to vote for attractive female candidates whereas women are more likely to vote for approachable male candidates. [48] This finding echoes the different standards women candidates are required to fulfill in contrast to male candidates to be taken seriously as contenders in political races. [48]

Research also indicates that the gender of a political candidate changes the way voters evaluate political qualifications. [49] What voters want to know about a candidate varies by the candidate's gender. For female candidates, voters seek out more competence-related information like education level and occupational experience than they do for male candidates. Thus, the information voters seek about candidates is gendered in a way that indirectly impacts voting behavior. [49] There is an overall bias that suggests that voters are using the candidates gender to make assumptions about political factors that are relatively closer to their own. [51] Some female voters naturally feel that women will untimely connect and understand their beliefs. [52]

There is also evidence that the presence of a female candidate encourages political engagement in voting. [53] The mere presence of a female candidate has been found to increase women's voter turnout rate. [53] This finding supports the idea that the descriptive representation of women in campaigns impacts the overall political attitudes and voting behavior of women. [53]

Additional considerations

Gender differences in political engagement

Gender differences in voting behavior are components of gendered differences in political engagement. [54] Political engagement refers to methods of individual involvement with political practices and can be broken down into conventional political engagement and unconventional political engagement. [54] Conventional practices include voting, letter-writing, and signing petitions. [54] Unconventional practices include participating in non-violent and violent protest, strikes, and picketing. [54]

Numerous cross-national studies have found that women are less likely to engage in political engagement practices broadly. [55] This means that women are less likely to engage in the practice of voting all together. Notable exceptions to this include voter engagement in the United States, where women have higher voter turnout rates in presidential elections, but are still less likely to participate in other forms of conventional and unconventional political engagement. [56]

A study based in Germany found that women with access to educational resources and who possess and live in societies that promote egalitarian values and practices are more likely to engage in politics than those who lack access to education and who live in societies with more essentialist norms and practices, in which gender roles are more prevalent and women are viewed as essentially "feminine" and fundamentally different from men. [57]

Black women's voting behavior

Women members of the U.S. Congressional Black Caucus 2019; Black women in the United States are much more likely than White women and than Black men to vote for Democratic candidates Congressional Black Caucus women 2019.jpg
Women members of the U.S. Congressional Black Caucus 2019; Black women in the United States are much more likely than White women and than Black men to vote for Democratic candidates

Black women in the United States are much more likely than White women and then Black men to vote for Democratic candidates, a trend that has persisted since the 1960s, [58] [59] and are far more likely to vote than their income would predict. [60] From 1980 to 2016, 91% of votes cast by Black voters were for Democrats, compared to 40% among Whites. [61] While income usually is associated with propensity to vote, this does not appear to hold true for Black women. [60] Analyses of data from the U.S. Cooperative Congressional Election Study, a large survey that matches respondents to their voter file records, has found that low income Black women have a significantly higher predicted voting rate compared to Black men, White men, or White women in the same income category. [60] While the researchers found that income did strongly predict voting participation among White people, it played less of a role in voter participation among Black women. [60] Some have theorized that this increased voter participation occurs because voting and other civic engagement are ways of coping with the stress of persistent racial discrimination. [62] [63]

Women's voting preferences in India

Much of the above discussion pertains to women's voting preferences in the United States and Europe. Recent[ when? ] trends in India, the world's largest democracy, have found that women are more likely to vote along religious, rather than gender, lines, even when parties offer policies that might appear to benefit women. [64] A survey of voters in West Bengal, India, found that voters’ party choice was associated with occupation and newspaper choice and not gender, marital status, or income. [65] Voter turnout for women in India has drastically surged since the 1990’s due to Indian women feeling inadequately represented despite progress in local governments. [66]

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Politics of the United States</span>

In the United States, politics functions within a framework of a constitutional federal republic. The three distinct branches share powers: the U.S. Congress which forms the legislative branch, a bicameral legislative body comprising the House of Representatives and the Senate; the executive branch, which is headed by the president of the United States, who serves as the country's head of state and government; and the judicial branch, composed of the Supreme Court and lower federal courts, and which exercises judicial power.

Theories of political behavior, as an aspect of political science, attempt to quantify and explain the influences that define a person's political views, ideology, and levels of political participation, especially in relation to the role of politicians and their impact on public opinion. Political behavior is the subset of human behavior that involves politics and power. Theorists who have had an influence on this field include Karl Deutsch and Theodor Adorno.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">League of Conservation Voters</span> Environmental advocacy organization in Washington, D.C., United States

The League of Conservation Voters (LCV) is an American environmental advocacy group. LCV says that it "advocates for sound environmental laws and policies, holds elected officials accountable for their votes and actions, and elects pro-environment candidates." The organization pursues its goals through voter education, voter mobilization, and direct contributions to political candidates. LCV includes 29 state affiliates. LCV was founded in 1970 by environmentalist Marion Edey, with support from David Brower. The group's current president is Gene Karpinski. It is headquartered in Washington, D.C., and has over two million members.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Voter turnout</span> Percentage of a countrys eligible voters who actually vote within elections

In political science, voter turnout is the participation rate of a given election. This is typically either the percentage of registered voters, eligible voters, or all voting-age people. According to Stanford University political scientists Adam Bonica and Michael McFaul, there is a consensus among political scientists that "democracies perform better when more people vote."

Political polarization is the divergence of political attitudes away from the center, towards ideological extremes. Scholars distinguish between ideological polarization and affective polarization.

A swing vote is a vote that is seen as potentially going to any of a number of candidates in an election, or, in a two-party system, may go to either of the two dominant political parties. Such votes are usually sought after in election campaigns, since they can play a big role in determining the outcome.

Party identification refers to the political party with which an individual is affiliated with. Party identification is typically determined by the political party that an individual most commonly supports.

Latino Americans have received a growing share of the national vote in the United States due to their increasing population. As of the 2020 U.S. Census, 62.1 million Latinos live in the United States, representing 18.9% of the total U.S. population, a 23% increase since 2010. This racial/ethnic group is the second largest after non-Hispanic whites in the U.S. In 2020, the states with the highest Hispanic or Latino populations were; Arizona, California, Florida, Illinois, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, and Texas. According to the Brookings Institution, Latinos will become the nation's largest minority by 2045 and the deciding population in future elections.

In many countries, women have been underrepresented in the government and different institutions. This historical tendency still persists, although women are increasingly being elected to be heads of state and government.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Voter turnout in United States presidential elections</span> Aspect of election history

Voter turnout in US elections is the total number of votes cast by the voting age population (VAP), or more recently, the voting eligible population (VEP), divided by the entire voting eligible population. It is usually displayed as a percentage, showing which percentage of eligible voters actually voted.

A gender gap in voting typically refers to the difference in the percentage of men and women who vote for a particular candidate. It is calculated by subtracting the percentage of women supporting a candidate from the percentage of men supporting a candidate.

Political identity is a form of social identity marking membership of certain groups that share a common struggle for a certain form of power. This can include identification with a political party, but also positions on specific political issues, nationalism, inter-ethnic relations or more abstract ideological themes.

Voter segments in political polling in the United States consist of all adults, registered voters, and likely voters.

Sexism in American political elections refers to how sexism impacts elections in the United States, ranging from influences on the supply, demand, and selection of candidates to electoral outcomes. Sexism is inherently a product of culture, as culture instills a certain set of beliefs or expectations for what constitutes appropriate behavior, appearance, or mannerisms based on a person's sex. Sexism in American political elections is generally cited as a socially-driven obstacle to female political candidates, especially for non-incumbents, raising concerns about the representation of women in the politics of the United States. Such prejudice can take varying forms, such as benevolent or hostile sexism—the latter stemming from fears of women threatening the power or leadership of men.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Negative partisanship</span>

Negative partisanship is the tendency of some voters to form their political opinions primarily in opposition to political parties they dislike. Whereas traditional partisanship involves supporting the policy positions of one's own party, its negative counterpart in turn means opposing those positions of a disliked party. It has been claimed to be the cause of severe polarization in American politics. It has also been studied in the Canadian context, as well as in Australia and New Zealand. Cross-national studies indicate that negative partisanship undermines public satisfaction with democracy, which threatens democratic stability. Traditional partisans, on the other hand, are more likely to support their country's democracy, which promotes democratic stability.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Political polarization in the United States</span>

Political polarization is a prominent component of politics in the United States. Scholars distinguish between ideological polarization and affective polarization, both of which are apparent in the United States. In the last few decades, the U.S. has experienced a greater surge in ideological polarization and affective polarization than comparable democracies.

Gender and politics, also called gender in politics, is a field of study in political science and gender studies that aims to understand the relationship between peoples' genders and phenomena in politics. Researchers of gender and politics study how peoples' political participation and experiences interact with their gender identity, and how ideas of gender shape political institutions and decision-making. Women's political participation in the context of patriarchal political systems is a particular focus of study. Gender and politics is an interdisciplinary field, drawing not just from political science and gender studies but also related fields such as feminist political thought, and peoples' gendered treatment is commonly seen as intersectionally linked to their entire social identity.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Voter turnout in the European Parliament elections</span>

Elections to the European Parliament saw declining voter turnout between 1979 and 2014. However, voter turnout in 2019 European elections increased by 8 points compared to 2014. In spite of this exception for all Member States, the electoral mobilization remains weak compared to the national parliamentary elections. Moreover, turnout significantly differs from one country to another in Europe and across a time: in 2019 Belgium citizens participated the most with 88.47% and Slovaks the least with 22.74%. The potential factors that might influence these trends and their implications have attracted great scholarly attention. Identifying and analysing the factors that determine the relative low turnout at European elections is therefore critical, as it is one element that weakens the democratic legitimacy of the European Parliament.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Political views of Generation Z</span> Politics of those born from 1997 to 2012

Generation Z, colloquially also referred to as 'zoomers', is the demographic cohort succeeding Millennials and preceding Generation Alpha. Researchers and popular media use the mid-to-late 1990s as starting birth years, while they use the early 2010s as the ending birth years, with the generation generally being defined as those born between 1997 and 2012.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Political recruitment model</span> Political Recruitment Model

The political recruitment model is a framework, used by political scientists, to explain the stages a citizen goes through to become an elected official. The model has four stages: eligibles, aspirants, candidates, and legislators. There are barriers between each stage that has the potential to keep an eligible citizen from becoming a legislator. These barriers are individual resources and ambition, political party gatekeepers, and voters. The Political recruitment model is mainly utilized to study why women hold political office at lesser rates than men. Scholars use a supply vs demand model within the political recruitment framework to investigate where and why women "drop out" of the pipeline.

References

  1. 1 2 3 4 5 6 "Voting Behavior". www.icpsr.umich.edu. Retrieved 2023-05-03.
  2. ↑ "How Identity Shapes Voting Behavior". The University of Chicago Booth School of Business. Retrieved 2023-05-03.
  3. ↑ Jenke, Libby; Huettel, Scott A. (November 2016). "Issues or Identity? Cognitive Foundations of Voter Choice". Trends in Cognitive Sciences. 20 (11): 794–804. doi:10.1016/j.tics.2016.08.013. ISSN   1364-6613. PMC   5120865 . PMID   27769726.
  4. ↑ Caplan, B. (2007). The Myth of the Rational Voter: Why Democracies Choose Bad Policies - New Edition (REV-Revised). Princeton University Press. doi : 10.2307/j.ctvcm4gf2
  5. ↑ Healy, Andrew J.; Malhotra, Neil; Mo, Cecilia Hyunjung (2010-07-06). "Irrelevant events affect voters' evaluations of government performance". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 107 (29): 12804–12809. Bibcode:2010PNAS..10712804H. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1007420107 . ISSN   0027-8424. PMC   2919954 . PMID   20615955.
  6. ↑ Beck, PA, et al. (2002). The social calculus of voting: Interpersonal, media, and organizational influences on presidential choices. Am Polit Sci Rev 96 (1): 57–73.
  7. ↑ Garzia, Diego; Marschall, Stefan (2016). "Research on Voting Advice Applications: State of the Art and Future Directions". Policy & Internet. 8 (4): 376–390. doi:10.1002/poi3.140. hdl: 1814/45127 .
  8. ↑ Alvarez, R. Michael; Nagler, Jonathan (2000). "A New Approach for Modelling Strategic Voting in Multiparty Elections". British Journal of Political Science. 30: 57–75. doi:10.1017/S000712340000003X. S2CID   18214677.
  9. ↑ Sides, J., Shaw, D., Grossmann, M., & Lipsitz, K. (2023). Campaigns and elections: 2022 Election Update.
  10. 1 2 3 Schofield, P. and Reeves, P. (2014). “Does the factor theory of satisfaction explain political voting behavior?”, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 49 No. 5/6, pp. 968-992, 0309-0566. DOI: 10.1108/EJM-08-2014-0524
  11. ↑ Palfrey, Thomas R.; Poole, Keith T. (1987). "The Relationship between Information, Ideology, and Voting Behavior". American Journal of Political Science. 31 (3): 511–530. doi:10.2307/2111281. ISSN   0092-5853.
  12. 1 2 3 4 5 6 Brooks, Clem; Nieuwbeerta, Paul; Manza, Jeff (2006-03-01). "Cleavage-based voting behavior in cross-national perspective: evidence from six postwar democracies". Social Science Research. 35 (1): 88–128. doi:10.1016/j.ssresearch.2004.06.005. ISSN   0049-089X.
  13. ↑ Green, John Clifford, James L. Guth, Corwin E. Smidt, and Lyman A. Kellstedt. 1996. Religion and the Culture Wars: Dispatches from the Front. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers. [Google Scholar]
  14. ↑ Ben Milne, (2019) "General election 2019: "Do people still vote according to class?". British Broadcasting Corporation
  15. 1 2 3 4 5 Andreadis, Ioannis; Chadjipadelis, Th (2006). Differences in voting behavior (PDF). Fukuoka, Japan: Proceedings of the 20th IPSA World Congress. pp. 1–13. July 9–13, 2006.
  16. 1 2 Kyogoku, Jun'ichi; Ike, Nobutaka (October 1960). "Urban-rural differences in voting behavior in postwar Japan". Economic Development and Cultural Change. 9 (1): 167–185. doi:10.1086/449885. JSTOR   1151841. S2CID   154258987.
  17. 1 2 3 4 5 Bartels, Larry M. (2000). "Partisanship and Voting Behavior, 1952-1996". American Journal of Political Science. 44 (1): 35–50. doi:10.2307/2669291. ISSN   0092-5853.
  18. ↑ Nie, Norman H., Sidney Verba, and John R. Petrocik. 1976. The Changing American Voter. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. [Google Scholar]
  19. ↑ Robison, Joshua (December 2021). "What's the Value of Partisan Loyalty? Partisan Ambivalence, Motivated Reasoning, and Correct Voting in U.S. Presidential Elections". Political Psychology. 42 (6): 977–993. doi: 10.1111/pops.12729 . ISSN   0162-895X. S2CID   199372370.
  20. ↑ Evans, Geoffrey, and Robert Andersen. 2006. The Political Consequences of Trust. In Handbook of Political Science Research on the Middle East and North Africa. Berlin and Heidelberg: Springer, pp. 635–48. [Google Scholar].
  21. ↑ Jones, Bradley (2018-03-20). "Wide Gender Gap, Growing Educational Divide in Voters' Party Identification". Pew Research Center - U.S. Politics & Policy. Retrieved 2023-05-03.
  22. ↑ Alesina, Alberto, and Edward Ludwig Glaeser. 2004. Fighting Poverty in the US and Europe: A World of Difference. Oxford: Oxford University Press. [Google Scholar]
  23. ↑ Bartels, Larry M. 2008. Unequal Democracy: The Political Economy of the New Gilded Age. Princeton: Princeton University Press. [Google Scholar]
  24. 1 2 Bergman, Matthew Edward (4 May 2020). "Sorting between and within coalitions: the Italian case (2001–2008)". Italian Political Science Review / Rivista Italiana di Scienza Politica. 51: 42–66. doi: 10.1017/ipo.2020.12 . ISSN   0048-8402.
  25. 1 2 Junn, Jane; Masuoka, Natalie (December 2020). "The Gender Gap Is a Race Gap: Women Voters in US Presidential Elections". Perspectives on Politics. 18 (4): 1135–1145. doi: 10.1017/S1537592719003876 . ISSN   1537-5927. S2CID   213200599.
  26. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Studlar, Donley T.; McAllister, Ian; Hayes, Bernadette C. (1998). "Explaining the Gender Gap in Voting: A Cross-National Analysis". Social Science Quarterly. 79 (4): 779–798. ISSN   0038-4941. JSTOR   42863847.
  27. ↑ Manza, Jeff; Brooks, Clem (March 1998). "The Gender Gap in U.S. Presidential Elections: When? Why? Implications?". American Journal of Sociology. 103 (5): 1235–1266. doi:10.1086/231352. ISSN   0002-9602. S2CID   27569701.
  28. ↑ Monroe, Kristen R. 1995. The psychology of genocide: A review of the literature. Ethics & International Affairs 9: 215–39. [Google Scholar]
  29. ↑ Burns, Peter, and James G. Gimpel. 2000. Economic insecurity, prejudicial stereotypes, and public opinion on immigration policy. Political science quarterly 115: 201–25. [Google Scholar].
  30. 1 2 Faria, Giovana (2022-09-13). "Women's Rights: A Year After The Taliban Takeover". Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty. Retrieved 2023-05-03.
  31. 1 2 3 Schaeffer, Katherine (5 October 2020). "Key facts about women's suffrage around the world, a century after U.S. ratified 19th Amendment". Pew Research Center. Retrieved 2023-05-03.
  32. ↑ "Breaking cycles of violence: Gaps in Prevention of and Response to Electoral Related Sexual Violence". OHCHR. Retrieved 2023-05-03.
  33. ↑ Yoon, Mi Yung; Okeke, Christol (2019), Franceschet, Susan; Krook, Mona Lena; Tan, Netina (eds.), "Kenya: Women's Suffrage and Political Participation as Voters", The Palgrave Handbook of Women’s Political Rights, London: Palgrave Macmillan UK, pp. 243–256, doi:10.1057/978-1-137-59074-9_17, ISBN   978-1-137-59074-9, S2CID   158967676 , retrieved 2023-05-03
  34. ↑ Kittilson, Miki Caul (2016-05-09). "Gender and Political Behavior". Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Politics. doi:10.1093/acrefore/9780190228637.013.71. ISBN   978-0-19-022863-7 . Retrieved 2023-05-03.
  35. ↑ "Does Women's Knowledge of Voting Rights Affect Their Voting Behaviour in Village Elections? Evidence from a Randomized Controlled Trial in China | Gender Action Portal". gap.hks.harvard.edu. Retrieved 2023-05-04.
  36. 1 2 3 "Public Policy Issue Orientations". www.icpsr.umich.edu. Retrieved 2023-05-03.
  37. 1 2 University of Michigan. Survey Research Center (1976). The American voter. Angus Campbell. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. ISBN   0-226-09253-4. OCLC   2644153.
  38. ↑ Nie, Norman H.; Verba, Sidney; Petrocik, John R. (1979-12-31). The Changing American Voter. doi:10.4159/harvard.9780674429147. ISBN   9780674429130.
  39. 1 2 3 Campbell, Rosie; Shorrocks, Rosalind (2021-09-10). "Women Voters Taking the Wheel?". The Political Quarterly. 92 (4): 652–661. doi:10.1111/1467-923x.13053. ISSN   0032-3179. S2CID   239444723.
  40. ↑ VAUS, DAVID; McALLISTER, IAN (May 1989). "The changing politics of women: gender and political alignment in 11 nations". European Journal of Political Research. 17 (3): 241–262. doi:10.1111/j.1475-6765.1989.tb00193.x. ISSN   0304-4130.
  41. 1 2 Giger, Nathalie (2009-09-01). "Towards a modern gender gap in Europe?". The Social Science Journal. 46 (3): 474–492. doi:10.1016/j.soscij.2009.03.002. ISSN   0362-3319. S2CID   6199371.
  42. ↑ Inglehart, Ronald; Norris, Pippa (2003-04-14). Rising Tide. Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/cbo9780511550362. ISBN   978-0-521-52950-1.
  43. ↑ Eulau, Heinz; Fiorina, Morris P. (1981). "Retrospective Voting in American National Elections". Political Science Quarterly. 96 (4): 671. doi:10.2307/2149903. ISSN   0032-3195. JSTOR   2149903. S2CID   154631055.
  44. ↑ Becker, Jeffrey A. (1998-01-01). "Book Review: Warren E. Miller and J. Merrill Shanks, The New American Voter (Cambridge. Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 1996), pp. 624, US$19.95". Political Science. 49 (2): 311–313. doi:10.1177/003231879804900217. ISSN   0032-3187.
  45. ↑ "Evaluations of Government Performance". www.icpsr.umich.edu. Retrieved 2023-05-03.
  46. 1 2 Clayton, Amanda; O'Brien, Diana Z.; Piscopo, Jennifer M. (2018-09-25). "All Male Panels? Representation and Democratic Legitimacy". American Journal of Political Science. 63 (1): 113–129. doi: 10.1111/ajps.12391 . ISSN   0092-5853. S2CID   158870325.
  47. 1 2 3 "Candidate Characteristics". www.icpsr.umich.edu. Retrieved 2023-05-03.
  48. 1 2 3 4 5 Chiao, Joan Y.; Bowman, Nicholas E.; Gill, Harleen (2008-10-31). Santos, Laurie (ed.). "The Political Gender Gap: Gender Bias in Facial Inferences that Predict Voting Behavior". PLOS ONE. 3 (10): e3666. Bibcode:2008PLoSO...3.3666C. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0003666 . ISSN   1932-6203. PMC   2573960 . PMID   18974841.
  49. 1 2 3 Ditonto, Tessa M.; Hamilton, Allison J.; Redlawsk, David P. (2013-05-14). "Gender Stereotypes, Information Search, and Voting Behavior in Political Campaigns". Political Behavior. 36 (2): 335–358. doi:10.1007/s11109-013-9232-6. ISSN   0190-9320. S2CID   254936061.
  50. 1 2 Teele, Dawn Langan; Kalla, Joshua; Rosenbluth, Frances (August 2018). "The Ties That Double Bind: Social Roles and Women's Underrepresentation in Politics". American Political Science Review. 112 (3): 525–541. doi:10.1017/S0003055418000217. ISSN   0003-0554. S2CID   216906606.
  51. ↑ McGrath, Mary (Jan 24, 2023). "Are Voters Biased Against Women Candidates?".
  52. ↑ "Are Voters Biased Against Women Candidates?: Institute for Policy Research - Northwestern University". www.ipr.northwestern.edu. Retrieved 2023-11-20.
  53. 1 2 3 Atkeson, Lonna Rae (November 2003). "Not All Cues Are Created Equal: The Conditional Impact of Female Candidates on Political Engagement". The Journal of Politics. 65 (4): 1040–1061. doi:10.1111/1468-2508.t01-1-00124. ISSN   0022-3816.
  54. 1 2 3 4 "Political Participation". home.csulb.edu. Retrieved 2023-05-03.
  55. ↑ Inglehart, Ronald; Norris, Pippa (2003-04-14). Rising Tide: Gender Equality and Cultural Change Around the World (1 ed.). Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/cbo9780511550362. ISBN   978-0-521-52950-1.
  56. ↑ "Gender Differences in Voter Turnout". cawp.rutgers.edu. Retrieved 2023-05-03.
  57. ↑ O’Brien, Diana Z.; Reyes-Housholder, Catherine (2020-08-06), "Women and Executive Politics", The Oxford Handbook of Political Executives, Oxford University Press, pp. 251–272, doi:10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198809296.013.26, ISBN   978-0-19-880929-6 , retrieved 2023-03-27
  58. 1 2 Rigueur, Leah Wright (2020-11-21). "The Major Difference Between Black Male and Female Voters". The Atlantic. Retrieved 2023-05-04.
  59. 1 2 Gillespie, Andra; Brown, Nadia E. (2019). "#BlackGirlMagic Demystified: Black Women as Voters, Partisans and Political Actors". Phylon. 56 (2): 37–58. ISSN   0031-8906. JSTOR   26855823.
  60. 1 2 3 4 Laurison, Daniel; Brown, Hana; Rastogi, Ankit (2021-12-09). "Voting Intersections: Race, Class, and Participation in Presidential Elections in the United States 2008–2016". Sociological Perspectives. 65 (4): 768–789. doi:10.1177/07311214211059136. ISSN   0731-1214. S2CID   250056003.
  61. ↑ England, Paula (June 12, 2023). "Part of the gender gap in voting for Democrats arises because a higher proportion of women than men voters are Black". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 120 (25): e2221910120. Bibcode:2023PNAS..12021910E. doi:10.1073/pnas.2221910120. PMC   10288652 . PMID   37307489.
  62. ↑ Lafreniere, Bianca; Audet, Élodie C.; Kachanoff, Frank; Christophe, N. Keita; Holding, Anne C.; Janusauskas, Lauren; Koestner, Richard (2023-04-03). "Gender differences in perceived racism threat and activism during the Black Lives Matter social justice movement for Black young adults". Journal of Community Psychology. 51 (7): 2741–2757. doi: 10.1002/jcop.23043 . ISSN   0090-4392. PMID   37013338. S2CID   257923152.
  63. ↑ Szymanski, Dawn M. (August 2012). "Racist Events and Individual Coping Styles as Predictors of African American Activism". Journal of Black Psychology. 38 (3): 342–367. doi:10.1177/0095798411424744. ISSN   0095-7984. S2CID   145732073.
  64. ↑ Zakaria, Rafia (2019-05-02). "Why Aren't Women a Bigger Force in Indian Elections?". The New Republic. ISSN   0028-6583 . Retrieved 2023-05-04.
  65. ↑ Banerjee, Saikat; Ray Chaudhuri, Bibek (2018-01-02). "Influence of Voter Demographics and Newspaper in Shaping Political Party Choice in India: An Empirical Investigation". Journal of Political Marketing. 17 (1): 90–117. doi:10.1080/15377857.2016.1147513. ISSN   1537-7857. S2CID   156568212.
  66. ↑ "Women in Indian Politics". academic.oup.com. doi:10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198894261.013.20 . Retrieved 2024-12-06.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.