Skip to main content
Log in

The political consequences of alienation-based and indifference-based voter abstention: Applications to Presidential Elections

  • Published:
Political Behavior Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

We present a unified model of turnout and vote choice that incorporates two distinct motivations for citizens to abstain from voting: alienation from the candidates, and indifference between the candidates. Empirically, we find that alienation and indifference each motivated significant amounts of voter abstention in the 1980–1988 U.S. presidential elections. Using model-based computer simulations—which permit us to manipulate factors affecting turnout—we show that distinguishing between alienation and indifference illuminates three controversies in elections research. First, we find that abstention because of either alienation or indifference benefited Republican candidates, but only very modestly. Second, presidential elections involving attractive candidates motivate higher turnout, but only to the extent that abstention stems from alienation rather than from indifference. Third, paradoxically, citizens’ individual-level tendencies to abstain because of alienation are strongly affected by their evaluations of the candidates’ policies, whereas aggregate turnout rates do not depend significantly on the candidates’ policy platforms.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

FIG. 1
FIG. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Adams James, and Merrill Samuel III (2003). “Voter turnout and candidate strategies in American elections”. Journal of Politics 65:161–189

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Adams, James, Samuel Merrill, III, and Bernard Grofman. (2005). A Unified Theory of Party Competition: A Cross-National Analysis Integrating Spatial and Behavioral Factors. Cambridge University Press

  • Alvarez R. Michael and Jonathan Nagler (1995). “Economics, Issues, and the Perot Candidacy: Voter Choice in the 1992 Presidential Election”. American Journal of Political Science 39:714–744

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alvarez R. Michael and Jonathan Nagler (1998). “Economics, Entitlements, and Social Issues: Voter Choice in the 1996 Election”. American Journal of Political Science 42:1349–1363

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ansolabehere Steve and James Snyder (2000). “Valence Politics and Equilibrium in Spatial Elections Models”. Public Choice 103:327–336

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brody R.A. and Benjamin Page (1973). “Indifference, alienation, and rational decisions: the effects of candidate evaluation on turnout and the vote”. Public Choice 15:1–17

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burden Barry, and Dean Lacy (1999). “The Vote-Stealing and Turnout Effects of Third-Party Candidates in U.S. Presidential Elections, 1968–1996”. Presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Atlanta, GA

    Google Scholar 

  • Burden Barry (2000). “Voter turnout and the national election studies”. Political Analysis 8:389–398

    Google Scholar 

  • Citrin Jack, Eric Schickler and John Sides (2003). “What if everyone voted: simulating the impact of increased turnout in senate elections”. American Journal of Political Science 47:75–90

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Downs Anthony (1957). An Economic Theory of Democracy. New York, Harper

    Google Scholar 

  • Endersby James, Steven Galatas and Chapman Rackaway (2002). “Closeness counts in Canada: voter participation in the 1993 and 1997 federal elections”. Journal of Politics 64:610–631

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Enelow James and Melvin Hinich (1984). The Spatial Theory of Voting: An Introduction. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Erikson Robert and David Romero (1990). “Candidate equilibrium and the behavioral model of the vote”. American Political Science Review 84:1103–1126

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fiorina Morris (1981). Retrospective Voting in American National Elections. New Haven, Yale University Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Grofman Bernard, Guillermo Owen and Christian Collet (1999). “Rethinking the Partisan effects of higher turnout: so what’s the question?”. Public Choice 99:357–376

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Highton Benjamin and Raymond Wolfinger (2001). “The political implications of higher turnout”. British Journal of Political Science 31 (January): 179–192

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hinich Melvin and Peter Ordeshook (1970). “Plurality maximization vs. vote maximization: a spatial analysis with variable participation”. American Political Science Review 64:772–91

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hinich Melvin J. (1978). “Some evidence on non-voting models in the spatial theory of electoral competition”. Public Choice 33:83–102

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lacy Dean and Barry Burden (1999). “The vote-stealing and turnout effects of Ross Perot in the 1992 U.S. Presidential Election”. American Journal of Political Science 43:233–255

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martinez Michael and Jeff Gill (2005). “The effects of turnout on Partisan outcomes in U.S. Presidential Elections 1960–2005. Journal of Politics 67(4): 1248–1274

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Munger Michael C. and Gary Cox (1989). “Closeness, expenditure, turnout: the 1982 U.S. House Elections". American Political Science Review 83 (March):217–232

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Petrocik John (1987). “Voter turnout and electoral preference: the anomalous Reagan elections”. In: Kay Lehman Scholzman (eds), Elections in America. Boston, Allen and Unwi, Inc

    Google Scholar 

  • Piven Frances and Richard Cloward (1988). Why Americans Don’t Vote. New York, Pantheon

    Google Scholar 

  • Plane Dennis L. and Joseph Gershtenson (2004). “Candidates’ ideological locations, abstention, and turnout in midterm senate elections”. Political Behavior 26:69–93

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Riker William and Peter Ordeshook (1968). “A theory of the calculus of voting.” American Political Science Review 62:25–42

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sanders Mitchell (1998). “Unified models of turnout and vote choice for two-candidate and three-candidate elections”. Political Analysis 7:89–116

    Google Scholar 

  • Sanders Mitchell (2001). “Uncertainty and turnout”. Political Analysis 9:45–57

    Google Scholar 

  • Schattschneider E.E. (1960). The Semi-Sovereign People. New York, Holt, Rinehart and Winston

    Google Scholar 

  • Stokes Donald (1963). “Spatial models of party competition”. American Political Science Review 57:368–377

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Teixeira Ruy (1992). The Disappearing American Voter. Washington, D.C., The Brookings Institution

    Google Scholar 

  • Tucker Harvey J. and Arnold Vedlitz (1986). “Does heavy turnout help Democrats in Presidential Elections?”. American Political Science Review 80: 1291–1298

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weisberg Herbert and Bernard Grofman (1981). “Candidate evaluations and turnout”. American Political Quarterly 9:197–219

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wolfinger Raymond E . and Steven J. Rosenstone (1980). Who Votes?. New Haven, Yale University Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Zipp John F. (1985). “Perceived representativeness and voting: as assessment of the impact of ‘choices’ vs. ‘echoes”’. American Political Science Review 79:50–61

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jay Dow.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Adams, J., Dow, J. & Merrill, S. The political consequences of alienation-based and indifference-based voter abstention: Applications to Presidential Elections. Polit Behav 28, 65–86 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11109-005-9002-1

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11109-005-9002-1

Keywords

Navigation