Who cares about the culture war? Evidence from a vote choice conjoint experiment

IF 2.9 2区 社会学 Q1 POLITICAL SCIENCE
James Breckwoldt
{"title":"Who cares about the culture war? Evidence from a vote choice conjoint experiment","authors":"James Breckwoldt","doi":"10.1016/j.electstud.2025.102895","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Despite their recent prominence, it is unclear how electorally important new culture war topics (such as statues, LGBT+ representation in popular culture, diversity training, transgender athletes, curriculum diversity and university free speech) are for voters, particularly cross-pressured ones. To address this, this study conducts an original vote choice conjoint experiment in the United Kingdom to test the extent to which people base their vote on these new culture war issues when they are included in a policy platform alongside long-standing economic and non-economic issues. I find that culture war issues are consistently important for those with more conservative cultural beliefs, whilst those with right-traditionalist and, to a lesser extent, left-traditionalist values prioritize them when cross-pressured. These results highlight the political dynamics of contemporary culture wars and vote choice in multi-dimensional elections, as well as the value of studying political beliefs relative to each other.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48188,"journal":{"name":"Electoral Studies","volume":"94 ","pages":"Article 102895"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Electoral Studies","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0261379425000010","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Despite their recent prominence, it is unclear how electorally important new culture war topics (such as statues, LGBT+ representation in popular culture, diversity training, transgender athletes, curriculum diversity and university free speech) are for voters, particularly cross-pressured ones. To address this, this study conducts an original vote choice conjoint experiment in the United Kingdom to test the extent to which people base their vote on these new culture war issues when they are included in a policy platform alongside long-standing economic and non-economic issues. I find that culture war issues are consistently important for those with more conservative cultural beliefs, whilst those with right-traditionalist and, to a lesser extent, left-traditionalist values prioritize them when cross-pressured. These results highlight the political dynamics of contemporary culture wars and vote choice in multi-dimensional elections, as well as the value of studying political beliefs relative to each other.
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Electoral Studies
Electoral Studies POLITICAL SCIENCE-
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
13.00%
发文量
82
审稿时长
67 days
期刊介绍: Electoral Studies is an international journal covering all aspects of voting, the central act in the democratic process. Political scientists, economists, sociologists, game theorists, geographers, contemporary historians and lawyers have common, and overlapping, interests in what causes voters to act as they do, and the consequences. Electoral Studies provides a forum for these diverse approaches. It publishes fully refereed papers, both theoretical and empirical, on such topics as relationships between votes and seats, and between election outcomes and politicians reactions; historical, sociological, or geographical correlates of voting behaviour; rational choice analysis of political acts, and critiques of such analyses.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信