How (often) do voters change their consideration sets?

Roderik Rekker, Martin Rosema (Corresponding Author)

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

20 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

The consideration set model posits that in multi-party elections voters decide in two stages. We expect that in the consideration stage, when voters select viable options, ideological proximity is a key determinant, while in the choice stage election-specific factors become particularly important. This would imply that consideration sets are rather stable and that changes in voting preferences occur mainly within ideologically coherent consideration sets. This study examines both claims by analyzing panel survey data from Sweden and the Netherlands. Consideration sets were indeed rather stable, more so than voting intentions. After one year, voters still considered the same party in 81% of cases and only 13% of respondents shifted between ideological camps. This indicates that voters changed electoral preferences primarily within the boundaries of relatively stable consideration sets and ideological camps. These findings help to understand how elections can be volatile, despite the strong impact of highly stable ideological orientations.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)284-293
Number of pages10
JournalElectoral studies
Volume57
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Feb 2019

Fingerprint

election
voting
Sweden
Netherlands
determinants

Cite this

@article{a76300629a054624a4ce821ff43c586e,
title = "How (often) do voters change their consideration sets?",
abstract = "The consideration set model posits that in multi-party elections voters decide in two stages. We expect that in the consideration stage, when voters select viable options, ideological proximity is a key determinant, while in the choice stage election-specific factors become particularly important. This would imply that consideration sets are rather stable and that changes in voting preferences occur mainly within ideologically coherent consideration sets. This study examines both claims by analyzing panel survey data from Sweden and the Netherlands. Consideration sets were indeed rather stable, more so than voting intentions. After one year, voters still considered the same party in 81{\%} of cases and only 13{\%} of respondents shifted between ideological camps. This indicates that voters changed electoral preferences primarily within the boundaries of relatively stable consideration sets and ideological camps. These findings help to understand how elections can be volatile, despite the strong impact of highly stable ideological orientations.",
author = "Roderik Rekker and Martin Rosema",
year = "2019",
month = "2",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.electstud.2018.08.006",
language = "English",
volume = "57",
pages = "284--293",
journal = "Electoral studies",
issn = "0261-3794",
publisher = "Elsevier",

}

How (often) do voters change their consideration sets? / Rekker, Roderik; Rosema, Martin (Corresponding Author).

In: Electoral studies, Vol. 57, 01.02.2019, p. 284-293.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - How (often) do voters change their consideration sets?

AU - Rekker, Roderik

AU - Rosema, Martin

PY - 2019/2/1

Y1 - 2019/2/1

N2 - The consideration set model posits that in multi-party elections voters decide in two stages. We expect that in the consideration stage, when voters select viable options, ideological proximity is a key determinant, while in the choice stage election-specific factors become particularly important. This would imply that consideration sets are rather stable and that changes in voting preferences occur mainly within ideologically coherent consideration sets. This study examines both claims by analyzing panel survey data from Sweden and the Netherlands. Consideration sets were indeed rather stable, more so than voting intentions. After one year, voters still considered the same party in 81% of cases and only 13% of respondents shifted between ideological camps. This indicates that voters changed electoral preferences primarily within the boundaries of relatively stable consideration sets and ideological camps. These findings help to understand how elections can be volatile, despite the strong impact of highly stable ideological orientations.

AB - The consideration set model posits that in multi-party elections voters decide in two stages. We expect that in the consideration stage, when voters select viable options, ideological proximity is a key determinant, while in the choice stage election-specific factors become particularly important. This would imply that consideration sets are rather stable and that changes in voting preferences occur mainly within ideologically coherent consideration sets. This study examines both claims by analyzing panel survey data from Sweden and the Netherlands. Consideration sets were indeed rather stable, more so than voting intentions. After one year, voters still considered the same party in 81% of cases and only 13% of respondents shifted between ideological camps. This indicates that voters changed electoral preferences primarily within the boundaries of relatively stable consideration sets and ideological camps. These findings help to understand how elections can be volatile, despite the strong impact of highly stable ideological orientations.

U2 - 10.1016/j.electstud.2018.08.006

DO - 10.1016/j.electstud.2018.08.006

M3 - Article

VL - 57

SP - 284

EP - 293

JO - Electoral studies

JF - Electoral studies

SN - 0261-3794

ER -