In most democracies, citizens who identify with a political party are more likely than non-partisans to turn out to vote. But why is this the case? Does voting foster partisanship, as prominent models of political learning and cognitive dissonance postulate? Or does partisanship encourage voting, as expressive voting models and social identity theory suggest? I introduce the concept of partisan duty to capture the role of partisan social identities in the turnout decision and present new empirical tests of the relationship between partisanship and voting. I leverage a unique institutional arrangement in Chile to establish the direction of causality with a regression discontinuity, and I implement a novel survey design with behavioral outcomes to identify causal mechanisms. Data from the US confirm that the main findings generalize beyond Chile. Electoral participation does not generate partisanship. Instead, partisanship mobilizes voters: it increases the expressive benefits to voting and generates a sense of duty to support one’s partisan group.
AcharyaA.BlackwellM.SenM. (2018). Explaining preferences from behavior: A cognitive dissonance approach. The Journal of Politics, 80(2), 400–411.
2.
AchenCSinnottR (2007). Taking sides: Learning and voting. In: Annual meeting of the midwest political science association.
3.
AnduizaE.GallegoA.MuñozJ. (2013). Turning a blind eye: Experimental evidence of partisan bias in attitudes toward corruption. Comparative Political Studies, 46(12), 1664–1692.
4.
AronsonE.FriedC.StoneJ. (1991). Overcoming denial and increasing the intention to use condoms through the induction of hypocrisy. American Journal of Public Health, 81(12), 1636–1638.
5.
AytaçS. EStokesS. C. (2019). Why bother?. Rethinking participation in elections and protests. Cambridge University Press.
6.
BakerA.RennoL. (2019). Nonpartisans as false negatives: The mismeasurement of party identification in public opinion surveys. The Journal of Politics, 81(3), 906–922.
7.
BankertA.HuddyL.RosemaM. (2017). Measuring partisanship as a social identity in multi-party systems. Political Behavior, 39(1), 103–132.
8.
BartelsL. M. (2002). Beyond the running tally: Partisan bias in political perceptions. Political Behavior, 24(2), 117–150.
9.
BesleyT. (2006). Principled agents?: The political economy of good government. Oxford University Press.
10.
BølstadJ.DinasE.RieraP. (2013). Tactical voting and party preferences: A test of cognitive dissonance theory. Political Behavior, 35(3), 429–452.
11.
BrehmJ. W. (1956). Postdecision changes in the desirability of alternatives. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 52(3), 384–389.
12.
BullockJ. G.GerberA. S.HillS. J.HuberG. A. (2015). Partisan bias in factual beliefs about politics. Quarterly Journal of Political Science, 10(4), 519–578.
13.
BurdenB. C.GreeneS. (2000). Party attachments and state election laws. Political Research Quarterly, 53(1), 63–76.
14.
CampbellA.ConverseP.MillerW.StokesD. E. (1960). The American voter. University of Chicago Press.
15.
CareyJ. (2002). Parties, coalitions, and the Chilean congress in the 1990s. In MorgensternR.NacifR. (Ed.) Legislative politics in Latin America. Cambridge University Press.
16.
CarlinR. E.LoveG. J. (2015). Who is the Latin American voter?. In CarlinR. E.SingerM. M.ZechmeisterE. J. (Eds.), The Latin American voter: Pursuing representation and accountability in challenging contexts. University of Michigan Press.
17.
CarlinR. E.LoveG. J. (2018). Political competition, partisanship and interpersonal trust in electoral democracies. British Journal of Political Science, 48(1), 115–139.
18.
CarrerasM.Castañeda-AngaritaN. (2014). Who votes in Latin America? A test of three theoretical perspectives. Comparative Political Studies, 47(8), 1079–1104.
19.
ChapmanE. B. (2019). The distinctive value of elections and the case for compulsory voting. American Journal of Political Science, 63(1), 101–112.
20.
CoateS.ConlinM. (2004). “A group rule—utilitarian approach to voter turnout: Theory and evidence”. American Economic Review, 94(5), 1476–1504.
21.
ConverseP. E. (1969). Of time and partisan stability. Comparative Political Studies, 2(2), 139–171.
22.
CorvalanA.CoxP. (2013). Class-biased electoral participation: The youth vote in Chile. Latin American Politics and Society, 55(3), 47–68.
23.
DaltonR. J.WeldonS. (2007). Partisanship and party system institutionalization. Party Politics, 13(2), 179–196.
24.
DownsA. (1957). An economic theory of democracy. Harper & Row.
25.
EggersA. C. (2014). Partisanship and electoral accountability: evidence from the UK expenses scandal. Quarterly Journal of Political Science, 9(4), 441–472.
26.
FeddersenT.SandroniA. (2006). A Theory of participation in Elections. The American Economic Review, 96(4), 1271–1282.
FestingerL.CarlsmithJ. M. (1959). Cognitive consequences of forced compliance. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 58(2), 203–210.
29.
FiorinaM. P. (1976). The voting decision: Instrumental and expressive aspects. The Journal of Politics, 38(02), 390–413.
30.
FranklinM. N. (1996). Electoral participation. In LeDucL.NiemiR. GNorrisP. (Eds.), Comparing democracies: Elections and voting in global perspective (pp. 216–235). SAGE Publications.
31.
GelmanA.ImbensG. (2019). Why high-order polynomials should not be used in regression discontinuity designs. Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, 37(3), 447–456.
32.
GerberA. S.HuberG. A.WashingtonE. (2010). Party affiliation, partisanship, and political beliefs: A field experiment. American Political Science Review, 104(4), 720–744.
33.
GrahamM.HuberG. (2021). The expressive value of answering survey questions. In The politics of truth. Oxford University Press.
34.
GreenD. P.BradleyP.SchicklerE. (2002). Partisan hearts and minds: Political parties and the social identities of voters. Yale University Press.
35.
GreeneS. (2002). The social-psychological measurement of partisanship. Political Behavior, 24(3), 171–197.
36.
HarsanyiJ. C. (1980). Rule utilitarianism, rights, obligations, and the theory of rational behavior. Theory and Decision, 12(2), 115–133.
37.
HeathO. (2007). “Explaining turnout decline in Britain, 1964–2005: Party identification and the political context. Political Behavior, 29(4), 493–516.
38.
HuddyL.MasonL.AarøeLene (2015). Expressive partisanship: Campaign involvement, political emotion, and partisan identity. American Political Science Review, 109(01), 1–17.
39.
ImbensG.KalyanaramanK. (2012). Optimal bandwidth choice for the regression discontinuity estimator. The Review of Economic Studies, 79(3), 933–959.
40.
ImbensG. W.LemieuxT. (2008). Regression discontinuity designs: A guide to practice. Journal of Econometrics, 142(2), 615–635.
41.
IyengarS.SoodG.LelkesY. (2012). Affect, not ideology: A social identity perspective on polarization. Public Opinion Quarterly, 76(3), 405–431.
42.
IyengarS.WestwoodS. J. (2015). Fear and loathing across party lines: New evidence on group polarization. American Journal of Political Science, 59(3), 690–707.
43.
JeritJ.BarabasJ. (2012). Partisan perceptual bias and the information environment. The Journal of Politics, 74(3), 672–684.
44.
LeonF. L. L. deRizziR. (2016). Does forced voting result in political polarization?. Public Choice, 166(1–2), 143–160.
45.
LondreganJ. (2000). Legislative institutions and ideology in Chile. Cambridge University Press.
46.
LunaJ. P.AltmanD. (2011). Uprooted but stable: Chilean parties and the concept of party system institutionalization. Latin American Politics and Society, 53(2), 1–28.
47.
LundellK. (2007). Partisanship and political support: the impact of compulsory voting. In European consortium for political research.
48.
LupuN. (2016). Party brands in crisis: Partisanship, brand dilution, and the breakdown of political parties in Latin America. Cambridge University Press.
49.
LupuN. (2018). Party brands, partisan erosion, and party breakdown. In MainwaringS. (Ed.) Party systems in Latin America: Institutionalization, decay, and collapse. Cambridge University Press.
50.
LupuN.StokesS. (2010). Democracy, interrupted: Regime change and partisanship in twentieth-century argentina. Electoral Studies, 29(1), 91–104.
51.
MackerrasM.McAllisterI. (1999). Compulsory voting, party stability and electoral advantage in Australia. Electoral Studies, 18(2), 217–233.
52.
MasonL. (2015). “I disrespectfully agree”: The differential effects of partisan sorting on social and issue polarization. American Journal of Political Science, 59(1), 128–145. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/ajps.12089.
53.
MullainathanS.WashingtonE. (2009). Sticking with your vote: Cognitive dissonance and political attitudes. American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, 1(1), 86–111.
54.
PowellG. B. (1986). American voter turnout in comparative perspective. American Political Science Review, 80(1), 17–43.
55.
QuintelierE.Van DethJ. W. (2014). Supporting democracy: Political participation and political attitudes. Exploring causality using panel data. Political Studies, 62(S1), 153–171.
56.
RauE. G. (2021a). Mobilization and partisan identities: A comparative study of partisanship under compulsory and voluntary voting. PhD thesis. Yale University.
57.
RauE. G.2021b. Replication data for: Partisanship as cause, not consequence, of participation. DOI: 10.7910/DVN/MRGM0k.
58.
ResnickD.CasaleD. (2014). Young populations in young democracies: Generational voting behaviour in sub-Saharan Africa. Democratization, 21(6), 1172–1194.
59.
RikerW. H.OrdeshookP. C. (1968). A theory of the calculus of voting. The American Political Science Review, 62(1), 25–42.
60.
RobertsK. M. (1995). From the barricades to the ballot box: Redemocratization and political realignment in the Chilean left. Politics & Society, 23(4), 495–519.
61.
RoemerJ. E (2019). How we cooperate: A theory of Kantian optimization. Yale University Press.
62.
SamuelsD.ZuccoC. (2014). The power of partisanship in Brazil: Evidence from survey experiments. American Journal of Political Science, 58(1), 212–225.
63.
SchuesslerA. A. (2000). Expressive voting. Rationality and Society, 12(1), 87–119.
64.
SinghS.ThorntonJ. (2013). Compulsory voting and the dynamics of partisan identification. European Journal of Political Research, 52(2), 188–211.
65.
SmetsK.van HamC. (2013). The embarrassment of riches? A meta-analysis of individual-level research on voter turnout. Electoral Studies, 32(2), 344–359.
66.
SvolikM. W. (2017). When polarization trumps civic virtue: Partisan conflict and the subversion of democracy by incumbents. Working Paper.
67.
TironiE. (1990). La invisible Victoria: Campañas electorales y democracia en Chile. Ediciones SUR.
68.
VenegasJ. I. (2016). ¿Por qué los jóvenes chilenos rechazan la política?. Desafección política juvenil en el Chile postransición. RiL editores.
69.
VowlesJ. (1994). “Dealignment and demobilisation? Nonvoting in New Zealand 1938–1990. Australian Journal of Political Science, 29(1), 96–114.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
