Response Scales in Voting Advice Applications: Do Different Designs Produce Different Outcomes?

Martin Rosema, Tom Louwerse

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

2 Citations (Scopus)
37 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Voting Advice Applications (VAAs) represent popular election campaign tools in many countries, enabling voters to discover which party or candidate provides the best match with their political preferences. This article examines the effects of design choices on these tools by focusing on the response scale that is used to measure the policy positions of parties and voters. We analyze the impact of scale length on the advice generated by these tools using user data from a VAA developed for the 2014 Dutch local elections. We transform the original 101-point scale into several alternative scale formats and determine if this leads to a different voting recommendation. We also examine the suitability of alternative scales for creating spatial models, which are often employed by VAAs. We show that the response scale has a potentially profound impact on the resulting advice (with voters receiving different VAA outcomes depending on the scale length), except for voters with an extremist response style. The findings have practical implications for the design of these tools: outcomes should be presented as a preference list, rather than focusing on the “best match.”
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)431-456
JournalPolicy & internet
Volume8
Issue number4
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2016

Fingerprint

Politics
voting
local election
election campaign
candidacy

Keywords

  • METIS-319610
  • IR-102579

Cite this

@article{87821ad296b3426ba7f2e0795c220ce1,
title = "Response Scales in Voting Advice Applications: Do Different Designs Produce Different Outcomes?",
abstract = "Voting Advice Applications (VAAs) represent popular election campaign tools in many countries, enabling voters to discover which party or candidate provides the best match with their political preferences. This article examines the effects of design choices on these tools by focusing on the response scale that is used to measure the policy positions of parties and voters. We analyze the impact of scale length on the advice generated by these tools using user data from a VAA developed for the 2014 Dutch local elections. We transform the original 101-point scale into several alternative scale formats and determine if this leads to a different voting recommendation. We also examine the suitability of alternative scales for creating spatial models, which are often employed by VAAs. We show that the response scale has a potentially profound impact on the resulting advice (with voters receiving different VAA outcomes depending on the scale length), except for voters with an extremist response style. The findings have practical implications for the design of these tools: outcomes should be presented as a preference list, rather than focusing on the “best match.”",
keywords = "METIS-319610, IR-102579",
author = "Martin Rosema and Tom Louwerse",
note = "Open access",
year = "2016",
doi = "10.1002/poi3.139",
language = "English",
volume = "8",
pages = "431--456",
journal = "Policy & internet",
issn = "1944-2866",
publisher = "Wiley",
number = "4",

}

Response Scales in Voting Advice Applications: Do Different Designs Produce Different Outcomes? / Rosema, Martin; Louwerse, Tom.

In: Policy & internet, Vol. 8, No. 4, 2016, p. 431-456.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Response Scales in Voting Advice Applications: Do Different Designs Produce Different Outcomes?

AU - Rosema, Martin

AU - Louwerse, Tom

N1 - Open access

PY - 2016

Y1 - 2016

N2 - Voting Advice Applications (VAAs) represent popular election campaign tools in many countries, enabling voters to discover which party or candidate provides the best match with their political preferences. This article examines the effects of design choices on these tools by focusing on the response scale that is used to measure the policy positions of parties and voters. We analyze the impact of scale length on the advice generated by these tools using user data from a VAA developed for the 2014 Dutch local elections. We transform the original 101-point scale into several alternative scale formats and determine if this leads to a different voting recommendation. We also examine the suitability of alternative scales for creating spatial models, which are often employed by VAAs. We show that the response scale has a potentially profound impact on the resulting advice (with voters receiving different VAA outcomes depending on the scale length), except for voters with an extremist response style. The findings have practical implications for the design of these tools: outcomes should be presented as a preference list, rather than focusing on the “best match.”

AB - Voting Advice Applications (VAAs) represent popular election campaign tools in many countries, enabling voters to discover which party or candidate provides the best match with their political preferences. This article examines the effects of design choices on these tools by focusing on the response scale that is used to measure the policy positions of parties and voters. We analyze the impact of scale length on the advice generated by these tools using user data from a VAA developed for the 2014 Dutch local elections. We transform the original 101-point scale into several alternative scale formats and determine if this leads to a different voting recommendation. We also examine the suitability of alternative scales for creating spatial models, which are often employed by VAAs. We show that the response scale has a potentially profound impact on the resulting advice (with voters receiving different VAA outcomes depending on the scale length), except for voters with an extremist response style. The findings have practical implications for the design of these tools: outcomes should be presented as a preference list, rather than focusing on the “best match.”

KW - METIS-319610

KW - IR-102579

U2 - 10.1002/poi3.139

DO - 10.1002/poi3.139

M3 - Article

VL - 8

SP - 431

EP - 456

JO - Policy & internet

JF - Policy & internet

SN - 1944-2866

IS - 4

ER -