When examining voting behavior over time, there are two areas one must look at to gain a better understanding of the process. The first, is why people vote the way they do, and the second looks at the individuals voting pattern over time. Since 1960, The American Voter, written by Campbell, Converse, Miller & Stokes, is still considered one of the most controversial pieces in the field of public opinion and election studies. Although there are numerous areas of exploration, the main purpose of this book was to further examine the psychological relationship of the voter from pre-adolescence to casting the tangible vote and the effects of parent-child socialization. A crucial argument presented states that party identification is the most important …show more content…
influence on voters' perceptions of political choice as well as their vote. The question remains, however, what is party identification? Party ID (party identification) is characterized by stability and resistance to contrary influence. Furthermore, it is formed early in life, inherited through the process of parent-to-child socialization (Campbell et al., 1960). But still, questions such as “Does socialization persist throughout the life-cycle” and “Do other factors influence party identification” remain unanswered. This piece of literature stood tall for a number of years, yet as time passed, conflicting studies were designed, created, and executed to contradict The American Voter relating to when socialization begins, how it progresses, and if party identification can change. Studies conducted by Robert Hess and Judith Torney, Kent Jennings and Richard Niemi, and David Sears and Nicholas Valentino in one way or another challenge the views of The American Voter whether it be philosophical and/or methodological. Over the duration of this essay I will explore studies regarding the definition of political socialization, and the potential life-cycle effects. Proper and just criticisms have exploited weaknesses in all arguments, yet there is a bridge between socialization and party identification over time. I believe Jennings and Niemi’s study uses the most efficient data (longitudinal/overtime) to present the most compelling and persuasive conclusion. Pre-adult socialization plays a key role in the child’s development of party identification, yet overtime, the individual reaches a plateau (mid-twenties/thirties) in which issues that matter directly to them can have a changing effect on party identification. The American Voter represents the analysis of psychological development of party identification through parent-child socialization.
Campbell et al., use survey data. In terms of methods, the model uses longitudinal data from the years 1948, 1952, 1956, while analyzing numerous interviews with the voters themselves (which constitute the American National Election Study, otherwise known as ANES). Based on how respondents answer, the Michigan Model groups individuals based on party identification and partisan preferences. The Michigan Model puts an emphasis on party identification as a psychological attachment, in that it’s created through the socialization of one’s parents. For those with a sense of attachment the strength, and direction of their party identification are crucial in accounting for attitude and behavior (Campbell et al., 1960). “The political party serves as the group, or base, for which the individual develops either a positive or negative identification with some degree of intensity (Campbell et al., 1960, pg. 122)”. This study’s main concern focused not on which way one tends to vote, but rather the influence of party identification on the vote. Party identification leads to one’s partisan feelings and attitudes, not the other way around, and tends to cause individuals to focus, see, and listen to information that is favorable to their party identification (also known as selective perception). Overtime, the Michigan Model claims that although party identification can fluctuate, it remains stable over time, and that issues and policies only play a small role in the voters’ decision (Campbell et al., 1960). The American Voter emphasizes that for a policy decision to affect the vote, the voter must at least have some knowledge in the issue or perceive a difference in the candidates. This study, however, was met with heavy resistance over the next few years, and still today, scholars nit-pick at specific areas of the study by crafting their own
studies. In the next portion of this essay I will be examining numerous counter arguments and studies which forced the Michigan scholars to revise their own study, but first, we must understand the process of political socialization.
...adults compared to older adults were less likely to respond that voting was extremely important for good citizenship (133). He concludes that it is too late for the generation of young adults that do not feel voting is an important civic responsibility, however, that it is not too late to convince them that politics matter by showing them that they are giving their opportunity to make important decisions that may impact their lives to others who have different ideas. One may agree with Wattenberg’s idea that habits follow people throughout their lives instead of changing as they cycle in life. His personal accounts are an impactful way to illustrate the importance of building a sense of duty at a young age and carrying that responsibility throughout one’s life.
In Sinclair’s analysis, voters, political activists, and politicians all play significant roles in creating and enforcing the ideological gap between the two major parties in Congress. This trend of polarization is rooted in the electorate
Millions of citizens around the United States, at some point in their lifetime, obtain a political ideology. Typically, their political values are influenced by their parents. Political scientists have identified that around age eleven, children begin to develop political opinion. According to Wilson’s, American Government: Institutions and Policies, 91% of a high school senior class indentified with the same party as their parents (American Government 158). I can attest to this since I in fact have the same party association as my parents. Ever since I was young, I categorized myself as a Democrat due to the fact that my elders were. However, as I have matured I am able to recognize the beliefs and ideologies that followers of certain parties possess. Since I have been more exposed to the political arena I am able analyze the issues more critically and hence I continuously question whether I should classify myself as a Democrat or Republican.
"Miller light and bud light…either way you end up with a mighty weak beer!" This is how Jim Hightower (a Texan populist speaker) described the choices that the U.S. electorate had in the 2000 elections. This insinuates that there is a clear lack of distinction between the parties. Along with numerous others, this is one of the reasons why the turnout is so low in the U.S. elections. In trying to explain the low figures at the U.S. elections, analysts have called American voters apathetic to indifferent to downright lazy. I disagree that the 50% (in recent elections) of voters that fail to turnout to vote are lazy and that they have just reason not too. I will also show that the problem lies within the system itself in that the institutional arrangements, electoral and governmental, do not create an environment that is conducive to mass participation. I will address these main issues and several others that have an effect on voter participation. In doing so I will compare America to other established democracies.
Singh, S., & Judd, T. (2013). Compulsory Voting and the Dynamics of Partisan Identification. European Journal of Political research, 52(2), 188-211. Retrieved from http://journals1.scholarsportal.info.proxy.bib.uottawa.ca/details.xqy?uri=/03044130/v52i0002/188_cvatdopi.xml
The United States national elections have been experiencing a steady decline of eligible voters showing up to vote. This steady decline has been ongoing since experiencing a significant increase in voter turnout from 1948 through 1960. Over the years there has been significant, meticulous research done to try to pinpoint the cause of the decline in voter turnout over years. All of this research has led to the production of an enormous number of literatures written on the perceived causes. The vast amount of literature produced has led to a number of competing explanations about this decline. The quest for the answer to the question of, why this decline in voter turnout, is very important for an overwhelming majority of Americans and our democratic system because the people/voters can only truly be represented by our government if all eligible voters go out and vote. For this paper I will examine four theories that attempt to explain the decline. The four theories that I will discuss are voting barriers, campaign contributions, negative campaign advertising, and finally the cultural explanation. However, through thorough exploration and critiques of the strengths and weaknesses of these four theories, we will find that the cultural explanation theory is currently the most persuasive theory in the group. Finally, I will also explore some reasons as to why citizens do vote as well.
Among the many ways Americans can participate in politics, voting is considered one of the most common and important ways for Americans to get involved. The outcome of any election, especially at the national level, determines who will be making and enforcing the laws that all Americans must abide by. With this in mind one might assume that all Americans are active voters, but studies show the voter turnout is actually astonishingly low. With this unsettling trend it is important to know what statistics say about voter turnout as was as the four major factors that influence participation: Socioeconomic status, education, political environment, and state electoral laws, in order to help boost turnout in future elections.
... Issues and Inheritance in the Formation of Party Identification. American Journal of Political Science, 970-988. Oakes, P., Alexander, H., & John, T. (1994). Stereotyping and social reality.
America’s low voter turnout has been attributed to the political parties’ failure to enliven the potential voters with the awareness and competitiveness in elections and the overall difficulty of the registration and voting process. The research portion of this project was predominantly provided from four books focused on voter turnout, whether it was perceived to be increasing or decreasing. The article was found using one of the books and altogether the sources provided analytical and institutional perspectives on American voter turnout. I believe voter turnout, along with voter registration, is steadily declining in America due to multiple factors, though the topics touched on above are largely impacting us today.
In this paper, the reasons why young people do not vote will be explored and solutions as to how to get them to vote will be proposed. According to the Center for Information and Research on Civic Learning and Engagement (CIRCLE), there are five main reasons why young people don’t vote. The graph presented uses census survey data from 2010 for citizens 18-24. The graph was broken down into two groups, those who are and are not in college. The first reason cited was being away from home or out of town, 23% of college students stated this and only 5% of people not in college stated this.
The United of States of America is a nation largely founded on the desires of its people to participate in governmental process. Once Abraham Lincoln said, “Government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the Earth.” Although, there is no government ran “by the people,” however, unless the American people appoint their public officials through free and fair elections, or simply voting. Voting is defined as a formal indication of a choice between two or more candidates or courses of action. Voting is a constitutional right and responsibility as an American citizen -- the right to voice his or her opinion in how our nation is governed and the responsibility of being informative or participating in democratic process.
Voting, a right many people have fought and struggled for, but sadly far too few people vote. According to the 2008 US Census Bureau, only 63% of all people registered to vote did. That looks good because over 50% voted but that's not until you find out that only 72% of America registered to vote. That means that the other 28% sat at home doing their own business when their country was deciding who would be their new leader for the next 4 years. Truthfully, only 45% of Americans are even voting, even though they could change the whole country for the better or for the worse. There were wide gaps betweens the amount that can vote and those who do it. People who reach the requirements are able to vote yet only 45% - 50% vote. For 30 years, voters
...in four different schools suggest explanations to the phenomenon that decides elections and helps fuel political debate daily. Whether it be parental socialization, policy and issue preference, media influence, or genes, the list of explanations is endless. Moving forward, one must ask, are there more feasible influences on party identification? Additionally, are there certain factors that are known to make and individual question their party identification so strongly that they fully change which party they affiliate with? I believe after reviewing the literature in ten different sources that parental socialization is the most influential factor of an individual’s party identification, but further research may suggest another factor being more influential. With further research, the true factor of what influences a person’s party identification may be pinpointed.
The United States of America, one of the most well developed countries in the world, has a huge
Political socialization is a universal process that is largely an uncontrolled and uncontrollable. All societies must find a way of passing on skills needed for people to perform political roles, varying from voting at an election to governing a country. Political socialization serves to replicate the status quo and as a result, political culture becomes a stabilizing force, providing a major barrier against planned change. Although the bulk of political socialization occurs during childhood, adults continue to be socialized. The process of political socialization is carried out through specific agents that can be divided into two groups; primary and secondary. Primary agents are informal and unstructured, whereas secondary agents are formal and organized. These agents teach us about their political opinions and the workings of the political system. The primary agents of political socialization are the family and the peer group. “Political scientists have long shown that family socialization is closely related to voting preference. Persons are very likely to vote for the party of their parents to the degree that both parents live together, vote and talk about politics”. (“politics in the Caribbean, voting behavior”, nd.) The family plays a major role as an agent for political socialization, because it has the earliest