The Rationality of Voting: A Response to Dowding

Abstract

According to rational choice theory, voting is an irrational act as the possibility of one vote influencing an election is minimal, yet voting incurs costs. However, individuals do vote. Keith Dowding has recently attempted to resolve this ‘paradox of voting’ through modifying the rational choice framework. Dowding argues that individuals vote out of a sense of duty, where this modification preserves the idea that individuals maximise their utility. This article rejects this claim. In order to retain any explanatory force, ‘duty’ must be modelled as a modified lexicographic preference. However, such preferences are prohibited by the axiom of continuity, required in order that a preference ordering can be represented by a utility function. The act of voting out of a sense of duty is not a utility-maximising act.