Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-q99xh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T17:52:22.306Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

The Causal Effect of Polls on Turnout Intention: A Local Randomization Regression Discontinuity Approach

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 February 2021

Pablo Brugarolas
Affiliation:
Pompeu Fabra University, Department of Political & Social Sciences, C/ Ramon Trias Fargas 25-27, 08005Barcelona,  Spain. Email: [email protected]
Luis Miller*
Affiliation:
Spanish National Research Council (IPP-CSIC), C/ Albasanz 26, 28037Madrid,  Spain. Email: [email protected]
*
Corresponding author Luis Miller

Abstract

This letter reports the results of a study that combined a unique natural experiment and a local randomization regression discontinuity approach to estimate the effect of polls on turnout intention. We found that the release of a poll increases turnout intention by 5%. This effect is robust to a number of falsification tests of predetermined covariates, placebo outcomes, and changes in the time window selected to estimate the effect. The letter discusses the advantages of the local randomization approach over the standard continuity-based design to study important cases in political science where the running variable is discrete; a method that may expand the range of empirical topics that can be analyzed using regression discontinuity methods.

Type
Letter
Copyright
© The Author(s) 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Society for Political Methodology

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.)

Footnotes

Edited by Jeff Gill

References

Achen, C., and Blais, A.. 2016. “Intention to Vote, Reported Vote and Validated Vote.” In The Act of Voting: Identities, Institutions and Locale, edited by Elkink, J. and Farrell, D., 195209. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Balcells, L., and Torrats-Espinosa, G.. 2018. “Using a Natural Experiment to Estimate the Electoral Consequences of Terrorist Attacks.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 115(42):1062410629.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Blais, A. 2000. To Vote or Not to Vote? The Merits and Limits of Rational Choice Theory. Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blais, A., Young, R., and Lapp, M.. 2000. “The Calculus of Voting: An Empirical Test.” European Journal of Political Research 37:181201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Calonico, S., Cattaneo, M., and Titiunik, R.. 2014. “Robust Data-Driven Inference in the Regression-Discontinuity Design.” The Stata Journal 14(4):909946.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cattaneo, M., Frandsen, B., and Titiunik, R.. 2015. “Randomization Inference in the Regression Discontinuity Design: An Application to Party Advantages in the U.S. Senate.” Journal of Causal Inference 3(1):124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cattaneo, M., Idrobo, N., and Titiunik, R.. 2020a. A Practical Introduction to Regression Discontinuity Designs: Extensions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Cattaneo, M., Idrobo, N., and Titiunik, R.. 2020b. A Practical Introduction to Regression Discontinuity Designs: Foundations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Cattaneo, M., Titiunik, R., and Vazquez-Bare, G.. 2016. “Inference in Regression Discontinuity Designs Under Local Randomization.” Stata Journal 16(2):331367.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cattaneo, M., Titiunik, R., and Vazquez-Bare, G.. 2017. “Comparing Inference Approaches for RD Designs: A Reexamination of the Effect of Head Start on Child Mortality.” Journal of Policy Analysis and Management 36(3):643681.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cattaneo, M., Titiunik, R., and Vazquez-Bare, G.. 2020. “The Regression Discontinuity Design.” Chap. 44 in The SAGE Handbook of Research Methods in Political Science and International Relations, edited by Curini, L. and Franzese, R., 835857. New York: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gerber, A., Hoffman, M., Morgan, J., and Raymond, C.. 2020. “One in a Million: Field Experiments on Perceived Closeness of the Election and Voter Turnout.” American Economic Journal: Applied Economics 12(3):287325.Google Scholar
Großer, J., and Schram, A.. 2010. “Public Opinion Polls, Voter Turnout, and Welfare: An Experimental Study.” American Journal of Political Science 54(3):700717.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Imbens, G., and Rubin, D.. 2015. “Causal Inference in Statistics, Social, and Biomedical Sciences.” In Causal Inference for Statistics, Social, and Biomedical Sciences: An Introduction. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Matsusaka, J. 1993. “Election Closeness and Voter Turnout: Evidence from California Ballot Proposition.” Public Choice 76:313334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller, L., and Brugarolas, P.. 2020. “Replication data for: The causal effect of polls on turnout intention: A local randomization regression discontinuity approach.” https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/LBEWBR, Harvard Dataverse, V1, UNF:6:MZ2djX3cH8yGrKbwJSPGkA== [fileUNF].Google Scholar
Morton, R., Muller, D., Page, L., and Torgler, B.. 2015. “Exit Polls, Turnout, and Bandwagon Voting: Evidence from a Natural Experiment.” European Economic Review 77:6581.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Muñoz, J., Falco-Gimeno, A., and Hernandez, E.. 2020. “Unexpected Event During Survey Design: Promise and Pitfalls for Causal Inference.” Political Analysis 28(2):186206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Titiunik, R. 2020. “Natural Experiments.” In Advances in Experimental Political Science, edited by Druckman, J. and Green, D., 835857. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Supplementary material: Link

Brugarolas and Miller Dataset

Link
Supplementary material: PDF

Brugarolas and Miller supplementary material

Brugarolas and Miller supplementary material

Download Brugarolas and Miller supplementary material(PDF)
PDF 223.4 KB