Explaining Time of Vote Decision: The Socio-Structural, Attitudinal, and Contextual Determinants of Late Deciding

Abstract

In the last decades, Western democracies have witnessed an increase in the proportion of voters who make their electoral choice late in the campaign. Consequently, scholars have paid considerable attention to this phenomenon and attempted to identify the factors which influence time of vote decision. This article reviews the literature on the determinants of decision timing. Several studies suggest that women and young citizens are more likely to be late deciders. Besides, party identification has been shown to hasten the electoral decision, whereas attitudinal ambivalence and network cross-pressures have been found to delay the crystallisation of vote intentions. Moreover, previous work reveals that strategic voters decide later than do their sincere counterparts. Special attention is also devoted to the debate on whether the phenomenon of late deciding can be seen as the consequence of a lack of political sophistication or as the product of a high level of political engagement.

Emotions, cognitions and moderation: understanding losers’ consent in the 2016 Brexit referendum

“…Another useful indicator of voters' moderation and ambivalence is likely to be the moment when they made their voting decision. A late voting decision is often related to an inability to decide between options that seem equally acceptable and thus remain in the balance until the very end of the campaign (Lavine 2001;Willocq 2019), something that is likely to make post-election rallying easier. It can also reflect lesser interest vis-àvis the electoral campaign and the issues being debated (Gopoian and Hadjiharalambous 1994).…”

Begin Again: Election Campaign and Own Opinions Among First‐Time Voters in Romania

“…Through all these elements, complex and informative campaigns can influence voting behavior. A large number of young people decide late in the campaign how to vote (Willocq, 2019). To them, short-term determinants are important (Dassonneville, 2016).…”

Participation in Voting Parties Based on Gender and Ages

“…According to Aribowo et al (2016), this evidence is due to several reasons: (1) elections do not contribute to the welfare of society, (2) lousy performance of political parties in front of the public, the parties only pay attention to group interest, (3) dishonesty and immoral of politicians, reflected by their corruption, and (4) parties do not realize their promise to their supporters, (5) bias exists to execute the public election. Through the literature study, Willocq (2019) emphasizes that gender and age can affect the voting decision besides the other determinants. Unlike Willocq (2019) with a theoretical perspective, Bibi (2020) points out the low participation for females in the general election in Pakistan.…”

“…Through the literature study, Willocq (2019) emphasizes that gender and age can affect the voting decision besides the other determinants. Unlike Willocq (2019) with a theoretical perspective, Bibi (2020) points out the low participation for females in the general election in Pakistan. When studying the voting behavior around 13 countries in East and Southeast Asia, Liu (2020) reports the gender gap in voting turnout in Malaysia: participation of women is lower than that of men.…”

“…Besides, a theoretical review of Willocq (2019), the studies trying to examine the association between ages and voting decisions with empirical data are available [see Wagner et al (2012), Aribowo et al (2016), Liu (2020), andIntyaswati et al (2021), for instance]. In their study, Wagner et al (2012) verify a positive relationship between age and voting decisions.…”