Open Access
Party, policy – or both? : partisan-biased processing of policy arguments in direct democracy
Loading...
Files
Party_policy_or both_JEPOP_2016PP.pdf (250.48 KB)
Embargoed until 2018, Post-print version
License
Cadmus Permanent Link
Full-text via DOI
ISBN
ISSN
1745-7297; 1745-7289
Issue Date
Type of Publication
Keyword(s)
LC Subject Heading
Other Topic(s)
EUI Research Cluster(s)
Initial version
Published version
Succeeding version
Preceding version
Published version part
Earlier different version
Initial format
Author(s)
Citation
Journal of elections, public opinion and parties, 2017, Vol. 27, No. 3, pp. 235-253
[POLCON]
Cite
COLOMBO, Céline, KRIESI, Hanspeter, Party, policy – or both? : partisan-biased processing of policy arguments in direct democracy, Journal of elections, public opinion and parties, 2017, Vol. 27, No. 3, pp. 235-253, [POLCON] - https://hdl.handle.net/1814/46204
Abstract
How do party cues and policy information affect citizens’ political opinions? In direct democratic settings, this question is particularly relevant. Direct democratic campaigns are information-rich events which offer citizens the opportunity to learn detailed information about a policy. At the same time parties try to influence citizens’ decision procedure by publishing their own positions on the issue. The current debate on whether “party” or “policy” has more impact on political opinions has not yet yielded conclusive results. We examine the effect of policy arguments and party cues on vote intention in two Swiss referendum votes using panel survey data. To the simple dichotomous question of “party cues or policy information” we add an additional twist in asking how party cues affect the processing of policy information through processes of motivated reasoning. We find first that both, policy arguments and party cues, have an independent effect on vote intention. However, in a second part of the analysis, we find strong evidence for partisan-biased processing of policy arguments – that is, voters tend to align their arguments with their preferred party’s position. Our conclusions with regard to the democratic quality of these vote decisions are therefore ambivalent.
Table of Contents
Additional Information
Supplemental data for this article can be accessed at http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17457289.2016.1254641
Published online: 10 Nov 2016
Published online: 10 Nov 2016
External Links
Publisher
Version
Research Projects
European Commission, 338875
Sponsorship and Funder Information
ERC POLCON project funded.