Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-669899f699-qzcqf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-04-30T03:03:04.847Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

16 - Voter Mobilization

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 June 2012

By
Melissa R. Michelson  and
David W. Nickerson
Edited by
James N. Druckman ,
Donald P. Greene ,
James H. Kuklinski  and
Arthur Lupia
Melissa R. Michelson
Affiliation:
Menlo College
David W. Nickerson
Affiliation:
University of Notre Dame
James N. Druckman
Affiliation:
Northwestern University, Illinois
Donald P. Greene
Affiliation:
Yale University, Connecticut
James H. Kuklinski
Affiliation:
University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign
Arthur Lupia
Affiliation:
University of Michigan, Ann Arbor
Get access

Summary

Civic participation is an essential component of a healthy democracy. Voting allows citizens to communicate preferences to elected officials and influence who holds public office. At the same time, deficiencies and asymmetries of participation in the United States call into question the representativeness of elected officials and public policies. Yet, although political activity is crucial for the equal protection of interests, participation is often seen by individuals as irrational or excessively costly, and it is well known that turnout in the United States lags well behind that of other democracies. Scholars have consistently found that participation is linked to socioeconomic variables, psychological orientations, and recruitment. Candidates, parties, and organizations thus spend considerable effort mobilizing electoral activity. This chapter highlights contributions made by field experiments to the study of voter mobilization, the problems faced by such work, and opportunities for future study.

Observational Studies

Nonexperimental studies have primarily relied on survey research to demonstrate correlations between self-reported mobilization and civic-minded behaviors, while also controlling for demographic characteristics (e.g., age, education, income) that are known to be significant predictors of turnout. The conclusion usually reached is that mobilization efforts are generally effective (e.g., Rosenstone and Hansen 1993; Verba, Schlozman, and Brady 1995). However, four major empirical hurdles render this conclusion suspect.

Type
Chapter
Information
Cambridge Handbook of Experimental Political Science , pp. 228 - 240
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2011

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Adams, William C., and Smith, Dennis J.. 1980. “Effects of Telephone Canvassing on Turnout and Preferences: A Field Experiment.” Public Opinion Quarterly 44: 53–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Angrist, Joshua D., Imbens, Guido W., and Rubin, Donald B.. 1996. “Identification of Causal Effects Using Instrumental Variables.” Journal of the American Statistical Association 91: 444–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arceneaux, Kevin T. 2007. “I'm Asking for Your Support: The Effects of Personally Delivered Campaign Messages on Voting Decisions and Opinion Formation.” Quarterly Journal of Political Science 2: 43–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arceneaux, Kevin, Gerber, Alan S., and Green, Donald P.. 2006. “Comparing Experimental and Matching Methods Using a Large-Scale Voter Mobilization Experiment.” Political Analysis 14: 1–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arceneaux, Kevin, and Nickerson, David W.. 2009. “Who Is Mobilized to Vote? A Re-Analysis of 11 Field Experiments.” American Journal of Political Science 53: 1–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bergan, Daniel E. 2007. “Does Grassroots Lobbying Work?: A Field Experiment Measuring the Effects of an e-Mail Lobbying Campaign on Legislative Behavior.” American Politics Research 37: 327–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dale, Allison, and Strauss, Aaron. 2007. “Text Messaging as a Youth Mobilization Tool: An Experiment with a Post-Treatment Survey.” Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Chicago.
Eldersveld, Samuel J. 1956. “Experimental Propaganda Techniques and Voting Behavior.” American Political Science Review 50: 54–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fishbein, Martin, and Ajzen, Icek. 1975. Belief, Attitude, Intention and Behavior: An Introduction to Theory and Research. Reading, MA: Addison Wesley.Google Scholar
Fisher, Ronald A. 1925. Statistical Methods for Research Workers. London: Oliver & Boyd.Google Scholar
Gaines, Brian J., Kuklinski, James H., and Quirk, Paul J.. 2007. “The Logic of the Survey Experiment Reexamined.” Political Analysis 15: 1–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gerber, Alan S. 2004. “Does Campaign Spending Work? Field Experiments Provide Evidence and Suggest New Theory.” American Behavioral Scientist 47: 541–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gerber, Alan S., and Green, Donald P.. 2000. “The Effects of Canvassing, Direct Mail, and Telephone Contact on Voter Turnout: A Field Experiment.” American Political Science Review 94: 653–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gerber, Alan S., Green, Donald P., and Larimer, Christopher W.. 2008. “Social Pressure and Voter Turnout: Evidence from a Large-Scale Field Experiment.” American Political Science Review 102: 33–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gerber, Alan S., Green, Donald P., and Shachar, Ron. 2003. “Voting May Be Habit Forming: Evidence from a Randomized Field Experiment.” American Journal of Political Science 47: 540–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gerber, Alan, Gimpel, James G., Green, Donald P., and Shaw, Daron R.. 2007. “The Influence of Television and Radio Advertising on Candidate Evaluations: Results from a Large-Scale Randomized Experiment.” Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association, Chicago.
Gerber, Alan S., and Rogers, Todd. 2009. “Descriptive Social Norms and Motivation to Vote: Everybody's Voting and So Should You.” Journal of Politics 71: 178–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gollwitzer, Peter M. 1999. “Implementation Intentions: Strong Effects of Simple Plans.” American Psychologist 54: 493–503.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gosnell, Harold F. 1927. Getting-Out-the-Vote: An Experiment in the Stimulation of Voting. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Green, Donald P., and Gerber, Alan S.. 2008. Get Out the Vote: How to Increase Voter Turnout. 2nd ed. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.Google Scholar
Green, Donald P., and Vavreck, Lynn. 2008. “Analysis of Cluster-Randomized Field Experiments.” Political Analysis 16: 138–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greenwald, Anthony G., Carnot, Catherine G., Beach, Rebecca, and Young, Barbara. 1987. “Increasing Voting Behavior by Asking People if They Expect to Vote.” Journal of Applied Psychology 72: 315–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ha, Shang E., and Karlan, Dean S.. 2009. “Get-Out-the-Vote Phone Calls: Does Quality Matter?” American Politics Research 37: 353–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Han, Hahrie C. 2009. “Does the Content of Political Appeals Matter in Motivating Participation? A Field Experiment on Self-Disclosure in Political Appeals.” Political Behavior 31: 103–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Imai, Kosuke. 2005. “Do Get-Out-the-Vote Calls Reduce Turnout? The Importance of Statistical Methods for Field Experiments.” American Political Science Review 99: 283–300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Michelson, Melissa R. 2005. “Meeting the Challenge of Latino Voter Mobilization.” Annals of Political and Social Science 601: 85–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Michelson, Melissa R., Bedolla, Lisa García, and Green, Donald P.. 2007. “New Experiments in Minority Voter Mobilization: A Report on the California Votes Initiative.” In Insight. San Francisco: The James Irvine Foundation.Google Scholar
Michelson, Melissa R., Bedolla, Lisa García, and Green, Donald P.. 2008. “New Experiments in Minority Voter Mobilization: Second in a Series of Reports on the California Votes Initiative.” In Insight. San Francisco: The James Irvine Foundation.Google Scholar
Michelson, Melissa R., Bedolla, Lisa García, and Green, Donald P.. 2009. “New Experiments in Minority Voter Mobilization: Final Report on the California Votes Initiative.” In Insight. San Francisco: The James Irvine Foundation.Google Scholar
Michelson, Melissa R., Bedolla, Lisa García, and McConnell, Margaret A.. 2009. “Heeding the Call: The Effect of Targeted Two-Round Phonebanks on Voter Turnout.” Journal of Politics 71: 1549–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Middleton, Joel A., and Green, Donald P.. 2008. “Do Community-Based Voter Mobilization Campaigns Work Even in Battleground States? Evaluating the Effectiveness of MoveOn's 2004 Outreach Campaign.” Quarterly Journal of Political Science 3: 63–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller, Joanne A., and Krosnick, Jon A.. 2004. “Threat as a Motivator of Political Activism: A Field Experiment.” Political Psychology 25: 507–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller, Roy E., Bositis, David A., and Baer, Delise L.. 1981. “Stimulating Voter Turnout in a Primary: Field Experiment with a Precinct Committeeman.” International Political Science Review 2: 445–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nickerson, David W. 2005. “Scalable Protocols Offer Efficient Design for Field Experiments.” Political Analysis 13: 233–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nickerson, David W. 2006. “Hunting the Elusive Young Voter.” Journal of Political Marketing 5: 47–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nickerson, David W. 2007. “Quality Is Job One: Volunteer and Professional Phone Calls.” American Journal of Political Science 51: 269–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nickerson, David W. 2008. “Is Voting Contagious? Evidence from Two Field Experiments.” American Political Science Review 102: 49–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nickerson, David W., and Rogers, Todd. 2010. “Do You Have a Voting Plan? Implementation Intentions, Voter Turnout, and Organic Plan Making.” Psychological Science 21: 194–99.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Panagopoulos, Costas. 2009a. “Partisan and Nonpartisan Message Content and Voter Mobilization: Field Experimental Evidence.” Political Research Quarterly 62: 70–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Panagopoulos, Costas. 2009b. “Turning Out, Cashing In: Extrinsic Rewards, Extrinsic Rewards, Intrinsic Motivation and Voting.” Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association, Chicago.
Rind, Bruce, and Benjamin, Daniel. 1994. “Effects of Public Image Concerns and Self-Image on Compliance.” Journal of Social Psychology 134: 19–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosenstone, Steven J., and Hansen, John Mark. 1993. Mobilization, Participation, and Democracy in America. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Sartori, Anne E. 2003. “An Estimator for Some Binary-Outcome Selection Models without Exclusion Restrictions.” Political Analysis 11: 111–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sherman, Steven J. 1980. “On the Self-Erasing Nature of Errors of Prediction.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 39: 211–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, Jennifer K., Gerber, and Alan S.Orlich, Anton. 2003. “Self Prophecy Effects and Voter Turnout: An Experimental Replication.” Political Psychology 24: 593–604.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vavreck, Lynn. 2007. “The Exaggerated Effects of Advertising on Turnout: The Dangers of Self-Reports.” Quarterly Journal of Political Science 2: 287–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Verba, Sidney, Schlozman, Kay Lehman, and Brady, Henry E.. 1995. Voice and Equality: Civic Voluntarism in American Politics. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×