Models designed for limited dependent variables are increasingly common in political science. Researchers estimating such models often give little attention to the coefficient estimates and instead focus on marginal effects, predicted probabilities, predicted counts, etc. Since the models are nonlinear, the estimated effects are sensitive to how one generates the predictions. The most common approach involves estimating the effect for the “average case.” But this approach creates a weaker connection between the results and the larger goals of the research enterprise and is thus less preferable than the observed‐value approach. That is, rather than seeking to understand the effect for the average case, the goal is to obtain an estimate of the average effect in the population. In addition to the theoretical argument in favor of the observed‐value approach, we illustrate via an empirical example and Monte Carlo simulations that the two approaches can produce substantively different results.

Recently, many states have reversed the decades-long trend of facilitating ballot access by enacting a wave of laws requesting or requiring identification from registrants before they vote. Identification laws, however, are not an entirely new phenomenon. We offer new theoretical insights regarding how changes in political power influence the adoption of identification laws. In the most extensive analysis to date, we use event history analysis to examine why states adopted a range of identification laws over the past several decades. We consistently find that the propensity to adopt is greatest when control of the governor’s office and legislature switches to Republicans (relationships not previously identified), and that this likelihood increases further as the size of Black and Latino populations in the state expands. We also find that federal legislation in the form of the Help America Vote Act seems to enhance the effects of switches in partisan control.

Utilizing studies which validate voter turnout, previous researchers have been able to identify a strong tendency for individuals to report voting when they in fact did not. In this article, we assess the effectiveness of a new turnout question on reducing voter overreporting in the National Election Study. Providing respondents with socially acceptable excuses for not voting, we found that this alternate question significantly reduces the over-reporting of turnout in the 2002 National Election Study by about 8 percentage points. Moreover, our analysis reveals that with the new question wording, estimates of the turnout rate for those usually thought to be the least likely to vote are considerably lower than estimates using the traditional question. Thus, not only did the experiment work to significantly reduce over-reporting, the new question provides deeper insights into the voting behavior of the American electorate that has implications for both scholars and reformers.

Most of the studies of voter behavior have dealt with voter turnout, but few have looked at other aspects of voting behavior that could be linked to balloting method. A reasonable amount of information has now accumulated about the impact of the shift from polling place elections to voting by mail on turnout, rolloff, drop-off, differences in voting for partisan offices and referenda, and differences in straight-ticket voting. This article analyzes recent time series of voting data in Oregon to assess the impact of the shift in voting method on these issues. The analysis includes data at the state, county, precinct, and individual levels, including individual ballots. The results suggest new criteria for evaluating shifts from one voting method to another that may be applied to other electoral reforms, such as those that will result from the Help America Vote Act.

Traditional theories of turnout are of limited applicability to college students: the concepts and measures associated with these theories were not designed with students in mind, and factors not considered by the traditional theories are relevant. We offer a new theoretical perspective for understanding college student turnout and test it using a new data set. Copyright (c) 2010 by the Southwestern Social Science Association.