Vote as you Think: Determinants of Consistent Decision Making in Direct Democracy

Abstract

This study investigates the conditions under which Swiss citizens take consistent decisions, that is, decisions that reflect their argument-based opinions, during direct-democratic ballots. In line with recent work on cognitive political behavior, we expect the drivers of consistent voting to be found at the individual and contextual level. At the individual level, we argue that political knowledge positively affects consistent decisions. At the contextual level, we anticipate a positive effect for campaign intensity, complexity and negativism. We estimate hierarchical logistic models based on VOX survey data (1999)(2000)(2001)(2002)(2003)(2004)(2005) and original data that captures the nature of political campaigns. Our results support our expectations for the situational level and (partially) for the individual factors.

The Maze and the Mirror: Voting Correctly in Direct Democracy

“…Research on negative campaigning effects has produced over the years a wealth of results on a wide range of attitudes and behaviors, such as attention to and memorability of information (Lau, ), election outcomes (Lau and Pomper, ; Mattes et al., ), strength of issue ambivalence (Nai, ; Lanz and Nai, ), approval of Congress (Globetti and Heterington, ), information search (Lau and Redlawsk, ); support and affect for the attacker (Arceneaux and Nickerson, ; Hitchon and Chang, ; Kahn and Kenney, ; Pinkleton, ), affect for the target (Arceneaux and Nickerson, ; Fridkin and Kenney, ; Kahn and Kenney, ; Pinkleton, ), cynicism (Cappella and Jamieson, ; Valentino et al., ; Yoon et al., ), and turnout (Ansolabehere and Iyengar, ; Ansolabehere et al., ; Nai, ; Kahn and Kenney, ; Lau and Pomper, ). Such research has, however, failed in providing a unified framework on negative campaigning effects.…”

“…Note that Milic () also claims to measure “correct voting” in Swiss direct democratic ballots. However, as we discussed elsewhere (Lanz and Nai, ) we are rather skeptical of this label, in that Milic's measure does not take into consideration the voter's profile in terms of values and preferences (see Milic, :404), and thus considerably diverges from the standards of the “normative‐naïve” measure used in the literature. This, of course, is just a matter of label and does not say anything about the quality of his results.…”

“…In recent literature, some attempts have been made to assess the quality of voters’ decisions in direct democracy though survey data. Among others, Nai () investigates the conditions under which Swiss voters support their decisions through ambivalent opinions, Lanz and Nai () assess the causes of “consistent” decisions, that is, decisions that are in line with the voter's position on the issue at stake and hence reflect his opinion on the principal issue‐related arguments, and Milic () compares argument‐based opinions and vote decisions for three projects voted on in November 2009. Those existing studies are informative on how lack of information and knowledge affects the quality of the decisions taken by voters in direct democracy, but they do so rather indirectly; this contribution, to the best of our knowledge, is the first attempt to assess systematically the determinants of correct voting in the “hard‐case scenario” of direct democracy…”

Sustainable mobility as Swiss cheese? – Exploring influences on urban transport strategy in Basel

“…However, they also suggest that politicians and lobby groups play an important role in shaping the outcomes of referendum campaigns. Lanz and Nai (2015) agree on this point, suggesting that contextual factors, such as campaign complexity, intensity, or tone influence voters to a greater extent than political knowledge, although both are important influences. Moreover, the political opinions of an individual may be internally inconsistent and unstable, thus accounting for variation in results on topics that appear similar (Lanz and Nai, 2015).…”

“…Lanz and Nai (2015) agree on this point, suggesting that contextual factors, such as campaign complexity, intensity, or tone influence voters to a greater extent than political knowledge, although both are important influences. Moreover, the political opinions of an individual may be internally inconsistent and unstable, thus accounting for variation in results on topics that appear similar (Lanz and Nai, 2015). Thus, although the majority of studies on direct democracy in Switzerland indicate that 'direct democratic participation of the citizen in the decision making process brings adopted policies closer to the preferences of voters' (Galletta and Jametti, 2015: 83), it is clear that individual preferences are subject to complex internal (cognitive) processes and, perhaps more significantly, to the influences of external factors.…”