skip to main content
10.1145/3145574.3145604acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagescssConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Third Parties, Turnout, and Social Influence: Why Third Party Entry May Decrease Turnout in Plurality Systems

Published:19 October 2017Publication History

ABSTRACT

Interpersonal social networks play a critical role in increasing turnout through voter cooperation and coordination. However, different contexts and institutions can inhibit this type of coordination by increasing voter uncertainty. We examine one mechanism by which third party entry in plurality voting systems might decrease turnout by increasing voter confusion about the political preferences of their fellow citizens. We extend the Fowler Turnout in a Small World model [18], providing theoretical evidence that voters may be disincentivized to turn out under three party competition in single member district plurality systems. Finally, we support our theoretical work with an examination of turnout in modern British elections, which provides empirical support for our theoretical findings.

References

  1. James Adams and Alexander K Mayer. 2008. Condorcet Efficiency with Adaptive Parties in a Spatial Model. Mathematical and Computer Modelling 48, 9--10 (2008), 1298--1307. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. John H Aldrich. 1993. Rational Choice and Turnout. American Journal of Political Science 37, 1 (1993), 246--278.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  3. Jonathan Bendor, Daniel Diermeier, David A Siegel, and Michael M. Ting. 2011. A Behavioral Theory of Elections. Princeton.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Andre Blais. 2000. To Vote or Not to Vote?: The Merits and Limits of Rational Choice Theory. Pittsburgh Press.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  5. Andre Blais. 2006. What Affects Voter Turnout? Annual Review of Political Science 9 (2006), 111--125.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  6. Andre Blais and Kees Aarts. 2006. Electoral Systems and Turnout. Acta Politica 41, 2 (2006), 180--196.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  7. Robert M. Bond, Christopher J. Fariss, Jason J. Jones, Adam D. I. Kramer, Cameron Marlow, Jaime E. Settle, and James H. Fowler. 2012. A 61-Million-Person Experiment in Social Influence and Political Mobilization. Nature 489 (2012), 295--298.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  8. Carew Boulding and David S Brown. 2015. Do Political Parties Matter for Turnout? Number of Parties, Electoral Rules, and Local Elections in Brazil and Boliva. Party Politics 21, 3 (2015), 404--416.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  9. Shuan Bowler, David Brockington, and Todd Donovan. 2001. Election Systems and Voter Turnout: Experiments in the United States. Journal of Politics 63, 3 (2001), 902--915.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  10. Pradeep Chhibber and Ken Kollman. 1998. Party Aggregation and the Number of Parties in India and the United States. The American Political Science Review 92, 2 (1998), 329--342.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  11. Gary W Cox. 1997. Making Votes Count: Strategic Coordination in the World's Electoral Systems. Cambridge University Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Gary W Cox. 2015. Electoral Rules, Mobilization, and Turnout. Annual Review of Political Science 18 (2015), 49--68.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  13. Paul A Djupe and Anand Edward Sokhey. 2014. The Distribution and Determinants of Socially Supplied Political Expertise. American Politics Research 42, 2 (2014), 199--225.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  14. Anthony Downs. 1957. An Economic Theory of Democracy. Harper.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Maurice Durverger. 1954. Political Parties, Their Organization and Activity in the Modern State. Wiley.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Aaron Edlin, Andrew Gelman, and Noah Kaplan. 2007. Voting as the Rational Choice: Why and How People Vote to Improve the Well-Being of Others. Rationality and Society 19, 3 (2007), 293--314.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  17. John A Ferejohn and Morris P Fiorina. 1974. The Paradox of Not Voting: A Decision Theoretic Analysis. The American Political Science Review 68, 2 (1974), 525--536.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  18. James H Fowler. 2005. Turnout in a Small World. In The Social Logic of Politics: Personal Networks as Contexts for Political Behavior, Alan S. Zuckerman (Ed.). Temple University Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. James H Fowler and Oleg Smirnov. 2005. Dynamic Parties and Social Turnout: An Agent-Based Model. The American Journal of Sociology 110, 4 (2005), 1070--1094.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  20. Bernard Grofman and Peter Selb. 2011. Turnout and the (Effective) Number of Parties at the National and District Levels: A Puzzle Solving Approach. Party Politics 17, 1 (2011), 93--117.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  21. Robert Huckfeldt. 2001. The Social Communication of Political Expertise. American Journal of Political Science 45, 2 (2001), 425--438.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  22. Robert Huckfeldt and John Sprague. 1992. Political Parties and Electoral Mobilization: Political Structure, Social Structure, and the Party Canvass. The American Political Science Review 86, 1 (1992), 70--86.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  23. Robert W Jackman. 1987. Political Institutions and Voter Turnout in the Industrial Democracies. The American Political Science 81, 2 (1987), 405--423.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  24. Casey A. Klofstad. 2007. Talk Leads to Recruitment: How Discussions About Politics and Current Events Increase Civic Participation. Political Research Quarterly 60, 2 (2007), 180--191.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  25. Michael Laver. 2005. Policy and the Dynamics of Political Competition. American Political Science Review 99, 2 (2005), 263--281.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  26. Michael Laver and Ernest Sergenti. 2011. Party Competition: An Agent-Based Model. Princeton University Press.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  27. Philip Lynch. 2007. Party System Change in Britain: Multi-Party Politics in a Multi-Level Polity. British Politics 2, 3 (2007), 323--346.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  28. Scott D. McClurg. 2003. Social Networks and Political Participation: The Role of Social Interaction in Explaining Political Participation. Political Research Quarterly 56, 4 (2003), 449--464.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  29. Caitlin Milazzo. 2015. Getting it Right When it Counts: Constituency Marginality and Voter Perceptions of British Parties' Policy Positions. Journal of Elections, Public Opinions and Parties 25, 2 (2015), 111--136.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  30. Pipa Norris. 2005. The British Parliamentary Constituency Database, 1992--2005. Release 1.3. Technical Report.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. Pipa Norris. 2010. May 6th British General Election Constituency Results Release 5.0. Technical Report.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. Thomas Plumper and Christian W Martian. 2008. Multi-Party Competition: A Computational Model with Abstention and Memory. Electoral Studies 27, 3 (2008), 424--441.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  33. Ronald B. Rapoport and Walter J. Stone. 2008. Three's a Crowd: The Dynamic of Third Parties, Ross Perot, and Republican Resurgence. University of Michigan Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  34. William H Riker. 1980. Implications from the Disequilibrium of Majority Rule for the Study of Institutions. The American Political Science Review 74, 2 (1980), 432--446.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  35. William H Riker and Peter C Ordeshook. 1968. A Theory of the Calculus of Voting. The American Political Science Review 62, 1 (1968), 25--42.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  36. Meredith Rolfe. 2012. Voter Turnout: A Social Theory of Political Participation. Cambridge University Press.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  37. John Barry Ryan. 2011. Social Networks as a Shortcut to Correct Voting. American Journal of Political Science 55, 4 (2011), 753--766.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  38. Alan Siaroff and Jared Wesley. 2015. Comparative Voter Turnout in the Canadian Provinces since 1965: The Importance of Context. Canadian Political Science Review 9, 1 (2015), 147--163.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  39. Betsy Sinclair. 2012. The Social Citizen: Peer Networks and Political Behavior. The University of Chicago Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  40. Jae Jae Spoon. 2011. Political Survival of Small Parties in Europe. University of Michigan Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  41. Greg Vonnahme. 2012. Registration Deadline and Turnout in Context. Political Behavior 34, 4 (2012), 765--779.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref

Index Terms

  1. Third Parties, Turnout, and Social Influence: Why Third Party Entry May Decrease Turnout in Plurality Systems

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in
    • Published in

      cover image ACM Other conferences
      CSS 2017: Proceedings of the 2017 International Conference of The Computational Social Science Society of the Americas
      October 2017
      194 pages
      ISBN:9781450352697
      DOI:10.1145/3145574

      Copyright © 2017 ACM

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 19 October 2017

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article
      • Research
      • Refereed limited

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader