The Power of Place? Testing the Geographic Determinants of African‐American and White Voter Turnout*

Abstract

Objective. This article evaluates the geographic determinants of both white and African-American voter turnout in presidential elections. We argue that perceptions of threat posed by African Americans influence white turnout, although the possibility of interracial contact can ameliorate these attitudes. Conversely, we contend the size of the co-racial population and segregation drives variations in African-American turnout. Method. We utilize geographic information systems (ArcGIS) mapping software in conjunction with Census and turnout data from the state of Louisiana. We test our hypotheses using a series of hierarchical linear regressions. Results. We find that African-American turnout is highest in parishes where African Americans represent a majority and segregation levels are low. White turnout is highest among whites in racially segregated, predominately white precincts. Conclusion. We conclude that different demographic factors drive variations in white and African-American turnout.

Group threat and voter turnout: Evidence from a refugee placement program

“…The “contact hypothesis” holds that increased, sustained interaction between in‐ and out‐group members, under specific circumstances, has the potential to reduce prejudices and conflicts (Allport, 1954). If this holds true, existing perceptions of group threat and, in the end, political mobilization among in‐group members may in fact decrease as the share of out‐group members increases (see Zingher & Moore, 2019; Zingher & Thomas, 2014). In this story, immigration may thus lower turnout: increased diversity stimulates more interethnic contact, which reduces perceptions of threat and in‐group bias as sources of political engagement among natives.…”

“…The findings from existing empirical research on the political effects of diversity is rather mixed. Indeed, studies analyzing political engagement and turnout display varied results (Bhatti et al, 2017; Fieldhouse & Cutts, 2008; Hill & Leighley, 1999; Leighley & Vedlitz, 1999; Matthews & Prothro, 1963; Schlichting et al, 1998; Zingher & Moore, 2019; Zingher & Thomas, 2014). A similarly heterogeneous picture emerges from research exploring the effects of diversity and immigration on vote outcomes (Arzheimer, 2009; Della Posta, 2013; Gerdes & Wadensjö, 2010; Giles & Buckner, 1993; Roch & Rushton, 2008; Rydgren & Ruth, 2011, 2013; Voss, 1996; Voss & Miller, 2001), and, more generally, on interethnic attitudes (e.g., Avery & Fine, 2012; Bobo & Hutchings, 1996; Dustmann & Preston, 2001; Fox, 2004; Hopkins, 2010; Markaki & Longhi, 2012; L. McLaren & Johnson, 2007; L. M. McLaren, 2003; Newman, 2013; Oliver & Mendelberg, 2000; Oliver & Wong, 2003; Schlueter & Scheepers, 2010).…”

“…In America, over half a century ago, Key (1949) noted a positive correlation between the presence of African Americans and voter turnout among whites; the perception of “group threat” allegedly stimulated higher political mobilization. However, other scholars have suggested that sustained positive interethnic contact may decrease existing perceptions of threat (e.g., Allport, 1954), implying that immigration, if it generates such contact, could potentially reduce existing in‐group bias as a source of political engagement and thus, by extension, lower turnout (see Zingher & Moore, 2019; Zingher & Thomas, 2014). Others instead argue that increased ethnic diversity, at least in the short run, decreases societies' stock of social capital and leads to a general withdrawal from public life, one consequence of which may be depressed voter turnout (see Putnam, 2007).…”