The dominant political science explanations of the causes of individual-level political participation converge on three sets of antecedents—resources/skills, recruitment, and political engagement. However, the overwhelming majority of the empirical tests of these antecedents rely on cross-sectional data, obscuring the fact that micro-level participation in the United States is more accurately characterized by instability rather than by stability. Using the American National Election Study and Jennings time-series data, we for the first time demonstrate the inability of traditionally examined antecedents to explain individual-level variation in political behavior over time. Finding extant theory inadequate in this regard, we propose a modification of participation theories that puts the concept of motivation in the foreground. We argue that a model that includes motivation may both pave the way for a better understanding of the variation in participation over time and suggest possible prescriptions to help alleviate representational biases at the individual level.
AldrichJ. H.MontgomeryJ. M.WoodW. (2011). Turnout as habit. Political Behavior, 33, 535-563.
2.
American Political Science Association Task Force on Inequality and Democracy. (2004). American democracy in an age of rising inequality. Washington, DC: American Political Science Association.
3.
AnsolabehereS.HershE. (2011). Who really votes? In SnidermanP. M.HightonB. (Eds.), Facing the challenge of democracy: Explorations in the analysis of public opinion and political participation (pp. 267-291). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
4.
AnsolabehereS.HershE. (2012). Validation: What big data reveal about survey misreporting and the real electorate. Political Analysis, 20, 437-459.
5.
BedollaL. G.MichelsonM. R. (2012). Mobilizing inclusion: Transforming the electorate through get-out-the-vote campaigns. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
6.
BerelsonB. R.LazarsfeldP. F.McPheeW. N. (1954). Voting: A study of opinion formation in a presidential campaign. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
7.
BerentM. K.KrosnickJ. A.LupiaA. (2011). The quality of government records and over-estimation of registration and turnout in surveys: Lessons from the 2008 ANES Panel Study’s registration and turnout validation exercises (American National Election Studies Working Paper No. nes012554. Retrieved from http://www.electionstudies.org/resources/papers/nes012554.pdf
8.
BerinskyA. J.LavineH. (2012). Self-monitoring and political attitudes. In AldrichJ. H.McGrawK. M. (Eds.), Improving public opinion surveys: Interdisciplinary innovation and the American national election studies (pp. 27-45). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
9.
BernsteinA.ChadhaA.MontjoyR. (2001). Overreporting voting: Why it happens and why it matters. Public Opinion Quarterly, 65, 22-44.
10.
CampbellA. L. (2002). Self-interest, social security, and the distinctive participation patterns of senior citizens. American Political Science Review, 96, 565-574.
11.
CampbellA. L. (2003). How policies make citizens: Senior political activism and the American welfare state. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
12.
CampbellA.ConverseP. E.MillerW. E.StokesD. E. (1960). The American voter. New York, NY: Wiley.
13.
ChongD. (1991). Collective action and the Civil Rights Movement. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
14.
ClarkP. B.WilsonJ. Q. (1961). Incentive systems: A theory of organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly, 6, 129-166.
15.
ClaryE. G.SnyderM.RidgeR. D.CopelandJ.StukasA. A.HaugenJ.MieneP. (1998). Understanding and assessing the motivations of volunteers: A functional approach. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 1516-1530.
16.
CravensM. D. (2013). The role of habit in voting: Making and breaking habitual voters (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Minnesota, Minneapolis.
17.
DahlR. (1961). Who governs? Democracy and power in an American city. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
18.
DavenportT. C.GerberA. S.GreenD. P.LarimerC. W.MannC. B.PanagopoulosC. (2010). The enduring effects of social pressure: Tracking campaign experiments over a series of elections. Political Behavior, 32, 423-430.
19.
EnosR. D.HershE. D. (2015). Party activists as campaign advertisers: The ground campaign as a principal-agent problem. American Political Science Review, 109, 252-278.
20.
FinkelS. E.OppK.-D. (1991). Party identification and participation in collective action. Journal of Politics, 53, 339-371.
21.
FowlerJ. H. (2006). Habitual voting and behavioral turnout. Journal of Politics, 68, 335-344.
22.
FowlerJ. H.DawesC. T. (2008). Two genes predict voter turnout. Journal of Politics, 70, 579-594.
23.
GamsonW. A. (1968). Power and discontent. Homewood, IL: The Dorsey Press.
24.
GerberA. S.GreenD. P. (2000). The effects of canvassing, telephone calls, and direct mail on voter turnout: A field experiment. American Political Science Review, 94, 653-663.
25.
GerberA. S.GreenD. P.LarimerC. W. (2008). Social pressure and voter turnout: Evidence from a large-scale field experiment. American Political Science Review, 102, 33-48.
26.
GerberA. S.GreenD. P.ShacharR. (2003). Voting may be habit-forming: Evidence from a randomized field experiment. American Journal of Political Science, 47, 540-550.
27.
GerberA. S.HuberG. A.DohertyD.DowlingC. M. (2012). Assessing the stability of psychological and political survey measures. American Politics Research, 41, 54-75.
28.
GerberA. S.HuberG. A.DohertyD.DowlingC. M.RasoC.HaS. E. (2011). Personality traits and participation in the political process. Journal of Politics, 74, 692-706.
29.
GerberA. S.RogersT. (2009). Descriptive social norms and motivation to vote: Everybody’s voting and so should you. Journal of Politics, 71, 178-191.
30.
GreenD. P.GerberA. S. (2008). Get out the vote: How to increase voter turnout (2nd ed.). Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
31.
HanH. (2009). Moved to action: Motivation, participation and inequality in American politics. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
32.
HarderJ.KrosnickJ. A. (2008). Why do people vote? A psychological analysis of the causes of voter turnout. Journal of Social Issues, 64, 525-549.
33.
HibbingJ. R.Theiss-MorseE. (2002). Stealth democracy: Americans’ beliefs about how government should work. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
34.
HightonB.WolfingerR. E. (2001). The first seven years of the political lifestyle. American Journal of Political Science, 45, 202-209.
35.
HolbrookA. L.KrosnickJ. A. (2013). A new question sequence to measure voter turnout in telephone surveys: Results of an experiment in the 2006 ANES Pilot Study. Public Opinion Quarterly, 77, 106-123.
36.
JamesW. (1890). The principles of psychology. New York, NY: Dover.
37.
JohnsonP. E. (1998). Interest group recruiting: Finding members and keeping them. In CiglerA. J.LoomisB. A. (Eds.), Interest group politics (5th ed., pp. 35-62). Washington, DC: CQ Press.
38.
KatzD. (1960). The functional approach to the study of attitudes. Public Opinion Quarterly, 24, 163-204.
39.
KlandermansB. (2003). Collective political action. In SearsD. O.HuddyL.JervisR. (Eds.), Oxford handbook of political psychology (pp. 670-709). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
40.
LeeT. (2002). Mobilizing public opinion: Black Insurgency and racial attitudes in the Civil Rights Era. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
41.
MadsenD. (1987). Political self-efficacy tested. American Political Science Review, 81, 571-582.
42.
McGrawK. M. (2000). Contributions of the cognitive approach to political psychology. Political Psychology, 21, 805-832.
43.
MilbrathL. W.GoelM. L. (1977). Political participation: How and why do people get involved in politics?Chicago, IL: Rand McNally.
44.
MillerJ. M. (2013). The motivational underpinnings of political participation. In La RajaR. J. (Ed.), New directions in American politics (pp. 209-232). New York, NY: Routledge.
45.
MillerJ. M.RahnW. (2002, May23-24). Identity-based feelings, beliefs, and actions: How being influences doing. Paper presented at the Conference on Social Connectedness & Public Activism, Center for Political Studies, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA.
46.
MillerW. E. (1980). Disinterest, disaffection, and participation in presidential elections. Political Behavior, 2, 7-32.
47.
MondakJ. J. (2010). Personality and the foundations of political behavior. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
48.
NickersonD. T. (2008). Is voting contagious? Evidence from two field experiments. American Political Science Review, 102, 49-57.
49.
OlsonM. (1965). The logic of collective action. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
50.
PierceJ. C.LovrichN. P. (1982). Survey measurement of political participation: Selective effects of recall in petition signing. Social Science Quarterly, 63, 164-171.
51.
PittmanT. S. (1998). Motivation. In GilbertD. T.FiskeS. T.LindzeyG. (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology (4th ed., Vol. 1, pp. 549-590). Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill.
52.
PriorM. (2010). You’ve either got it or you don’t? The stability of political interest over the life cycle. Journal of Politics, 72, 747-766.
53.
RogersT.FoxC. R.GerberA. S. (2012). Rethinking why people vote: Voting as dynamic social expression. In ShafirE. (Ed.), Behavioral foundations of policy (pp. 91-107). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
54.
RolfeM. (2012). Voter turnout: A social theory of political participation. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
55.
RosenstoneS. J.HansenJ. M. (1993). Mobilization, participation, and democracy in America. New York, NY: MacMillan.
56.
SalisburyR. H. (1969). An exchange theory of interest groups. Midwest Journal of Political Science, 13, 1-32.
57.
SchlozmanK. L.TierneyJ. T. (1986). Organized interests and American democracy. New York, NY: Harper & Row.
58.
SchlozmanK. L.VerbaS.BradyH. E. (2012). The unheavenly chorus: Unequal political voice and the broken promise of American democracy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
59.
SheagleyG.MillerJ. M.SnyderM. (2010, January). Adapting the Volunteer Functions Inventory to measure motives for political participation. Poster presented at the annual meeting of the Society for Personality & Social Psychology, Las Vegas, NV.
60.
SilverB. D.AndersonB. A.AbramsonP. R. (1986). Who overreports voting?American Political Science Review, 80, 613-624.
61.
SinclairB. (2012). The social citizen: Peer networks and political behavior. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
62.
SnyderM. (1974). Self-monitoring of expressive behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 30, 526-537.
63.
SnyderM. (1979). Self-monitoring processes. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 12, 85-128.
64.
SnyderM.GangestedS. (1986). On the nature of self-monitoring: Matters of assessment, matters of validity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 125-139.
65.
SpectorP. B. (1992). Summated rating scale construction: An introduction. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
66.
StukasA. A.SnyderM.ClaryE. G. (1999). The effects of “mandatory volunteerism” on intentions to volunteer. Psychological Science, 10, 60-65.
67.
TeskeN. (1997). Political activists in America: The identity construction model of political participation. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
68.
VavreckL. (2007). The exaggerated effects of advertising on turnout: The dangers of self-reports!Quarterly Journal of Political Science, 2, 325-343.
69.
VerbaS.NieN. H. (1972). Participation in America: Political democracy and social equality. New York, NY: Harper & Row.
70.
VerbaS.SchlozmanK. L.BradyH. E. (1995). Voice and equality: Civic voluntarism in American politics. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
71.
VolgyT. J.SchwarzJ. E. (1984). Misreporting and vicarious political participation at the local level. Public Opinion Quarterly, 48, 757-765.
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.
