Matching Items (2)
Filtering by
- Genre: Academic theses
Description
A large amount of research examines the effect of partisan polarization on the institution of Congress, yet we know remarkably little about this political phenomenon’s precise effect on the political behavior of the American electorate. Some scholars argue that polarization is healthy for democracy because it allows political elites to send clear cues to the mass public, but other scholars postulate that polarization is bad for democracy. Decades of research on voter turnout resulted in a vast accumulation of knowledge on the subject. However, scholars must pay greater attention to data collection and measurement strategies because the prevalent technique to quantify voter turnout artificially deflates participation rates. I take two paths to uncover the effects of partisanship on the decision to vote. From the micro perspective, I utilize a variety of partisanship measures based on survey data. From the aggregate perspective, I argue that calculating voter turnout based on the voting eligible population (VEP) is a superior measurement strategy to other techniques. I adoopt a VEP measure of voter turnout for state-wide races (1994-2010). The results suggest that polarization is an important factor that increases voter turnout at both the individual and aggregate levels.
ContributorsBumgardner, Erik (Author) / Espino, Rodolfo (Thesis advisor) / Fridkin, Kim (Committee member) / Kenney, Patrick (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2016
Description
Political party identification has an immense influence on shaping individual attitudes and processes of reasoning to the point where otherwise knowledgeable people endorse political conspiracies that support one's political in-group and simultaneously disparage an out-group. Although recent research has explored this tendency among partisans, less is known about how Independents respond in comparison. Previous research fails to identify the Independent as a unique type of voter, but rather categorizes this group as ostensibly partisan, not a separate phenomenon to investigate. However, most Independents purport neutrality and, by recent polls, are becoming a substantial body worthy of concerted focus. Many questions arise about who Independents really are. For example, do all who identify as Independent behave in a similar manner? Are Independents ideologically different than what is represented by a partisan label? Is the Independent category a broad term for something entirely misunderstood? A thorough investigation into the greater dynamics of the political environment in the United States is an enormous undertaking, requiring a robust interdisciplinary approach beyond the focus and intent of this study. Therefore, this study begins the journey toward understanding these phenomena; do Independents, as a whole, uniformly respond to statements about political conspiracy theories? To explore these possibilities, explicit responses are bypassed to evaluate the implicit appeal of political conspiracy theories. An action dynamics (mouse-tracking) approach, a data rich method that records the response process, demonstrates Independents are not in fact a homogeneous group, but rather seem to fall into two groups: non-partisan leaning and partisan leaning. The analysis exposes that relative to the baseline and control stimuli: (1) Non-leaning Independents reveal an increased susceptibility to implicitly endorse bi-partisan directed conspiracy theories when compared to leaners. (2) Republican-leaners demonstrate a stronger susceptibility to endorse right-wing aligned conspiracy theories (against Barack Obama), similar to Republican partisans. (3) Democrat-leaners, unlike Democrat partisans, do not demonstrate any particular susceptibility to implicitly endorse either right/left-wing aligned conspiracy theories (against Barack Obama or George W. Bush). Drawing from major theories from social, political, and cognitive psychology will contribute to an understanding of these phenomena. Concluding remarks include study limitations and future directions.
ContributorsJohnson, Chelsea (Author) / Duran, Nicholas D (Thesis advisor) / Robles-Sotelo, Elias (Committee member) / Hall, Deborah (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2017