If I recall correctly. An event history analysis of forgetting and recollecting past voting behavior

Abstract

The mechanisms behind vote recall inaccuracy are not well understood. The literature has been unable to separate inaccuracy due to the nature of the voter (such as non-attitudes) from inaccuracy due to interfering events after casting the vote (such as a change in vote intention). This paper employs event history analysis to disentangle time-invariant and time-variant explanations of recall inaccuracy. Using Dutch panel data on 20,936 respondents in 42 waves between 2010 and 2012 (and additional data collected between 2006 and 2010), we explain the likelihood of misreporting the 2010 vote during the subsequent electoral cycle. The analyses show that although both explanations play a role, voters' general level of volatility before casting the recalled vote matters less than changes in vote intention after the vote. We conclude that accurate recall is affected mainly by events rather than the nature of voters. Our findings imply that survey measures of voting behavior could be improved by offering cues on the elections of interest.

Radical distinction: Support for radical left and radical right parties in Europe

“… 7 This vote-choice question is asked every two years, implying that the last national election could be several years earlier, potentially yielding recall error. However, incorrectly recalled parties are often ideologically close to the original vote, and recall tends to be biased towards current party preferences ( Van Elsas et al., 2016 ). Given our interest in distinguishing radical-right and left parties from mainstream parties, and our focus on voting patterns more generally, vote recall measures are most appropriate.…”

Who Is Responsible for the Emergency Aid? Cash Transfer and Presidential Approval During the COVID-19 Pandemic in Brazil

“…8 Respondents from higher income brackets (above ten minimum ages) that did not have any recipients were not included in the models. 9 Moreover, although the survey included a question on the vote choice for president in the 2018 election, we did not attempt to balance the sample based on prior voting, since the vote recall question cannot be considered a pretreatment covariate because it is affected by short-term factors (Van Elsas et al 2014;Van Elsas et al 2016). As the vote choice question asked respondents to recall an event that occurred almost two years before receiving the benefit, we cannot rule out the possibility that those who received the benefit became less likely to declare a past vote for Fernando Haddad, Bolsonaro's challenger in 2018.…”

Clarity of voter choices: neglected foundation for ideological congruence

“…This choice was made because empirically our findings were less reliable (had lower levels of statistical significance) if we moved outside the span of time when memories of recent elections (and leftright stances adopted at the time of those elections) can still be considered reliable. Outside a six-month span, research has shown that memories become degraded by evolving partisanship in light of evolving political circumstances (see van Elsas et al 2016). Limiting our data in this way left us with 71 EB surveys fielded across 27 European countries between 2004 and 2016 (see our online Appendix B for details).…”