Is Voting Habit Forming? New Evidence from Experiments and Regression Discontinuities

Abstract

Field experiments and regression discontinuity designs test whether voting is habit forming by examining whether a random shock to turnout in one election affects participation in subsequent elections. We contribute to this literature by offering a vast amount of new statistical evidence on the long-term consequences of random and quasi-random inducements to vote. The behavior of millions of voters confirms the persistence of voter turnout and calls attention to theoretically meaningful nuances in the development and expression of voting habits. We suggest that individuals become habituated to voting in particular types of elections. The degree of persistence appears to vary by electoral context and by the attributes of those who comply with an initial inducement to vote.

How Effective Are Monetary Incentives to Vote? Evidence from a Nationwide Policy

“…It is also consistent with dynamic peer effects if the marginal voters affected by the changed monetary incentives increasingly drive others to also not vote as time goes by (Nickerson, 2008;Giné and Mansuri, 2018;Chong et al, 2019). A third possibility is that habit formation acts as a countervailing force and that those that are induced to not vote by the lower fine in 2011 become intrinsically less likely to vote in 2016, on top of new marginal voters that are affected subsequently (Coppock and Green, 2016;Fujiwara et al, 2016).…”

Will a Five-Minute Discussion Change Your Mind? A Countrywide Experiment on Voter Choice in France

“…While transitory shocks to voter turnout have been found to generate persistent effects due to long-lasting impact of the shocks themselves or to habit formation (e.g., Gerber, Green, and Shachar 2003;Meredith 2009;Cutts, Fieldhouse, and John 2009;Davenport et al 2010;Fujiwara, Meng, and Vogel 2016;Coppock and Green 2016), the present study is the first to show that effects on vote choice can persist as well. In fact, contrasting with Gerber et al (2011), the impact of the visits almost entirely persisted in the subsequent parliamentary elections held one month after the presidential vote.…”

“…Additional canvassing is even less likely to explain the (lower) persistence at the European elections, where the intensity of the field campaign was much lower still. Shachar 2003;Meredith 2009;Cutts et al 2009;Davenport et al 2010;Fujiwara, Meng, and Vogl 2016;Coppock and Green 2016). While estimates of the magnitude of persistence differ, Fujiwara, Meng, and Vogl (2016) find that habit formation alone can generate near-to-full persistence of the impact of rainfall shocks on participation four years later.…”

The Differential Effects of Stress on Voter Turnout

“…A large body of evidence now supports the importance of the habit-formation aspects of voting. Voters who are mobilized to vote for the first time in one election are more likely to vote in subsequent elections than are similar voters who were not mobilized (Coppock & Green, 2015;Gerber, Green, & Shachar, 2003;Green & Shachar, 2000). People who have participated in the political process in the past are more likely to participate again in the future, in part because of their characteristics (Grant & Rudolph, 2002), but also because future electoral campaigns are more likely to target them in their efforts (Hassell & Monson, 2014).…”