Do voters on the left show more solidarity behaviour? Novel behavioural evidence from interactive surveys in Austria, West and East Germany

IF 2.3 2区 社会学 Q1 POLITICAL SCIENCE
Achim Goerres, Jakob Eicheler
{"title":"Do voters on the left show more solidarity behaviour? Novel behavioural evidence from interactive surveys in Austria, West and East Germany","authors":"Achim Goerres,&nbsp;Jakob Eicheler","doi":"10.1016/j.electstud.2025.102980","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Voters on the left typically demand more public redistribution than those on the right. While existing research has demonstrated differences in social behaviour by political ideology, we know little on whether left voters are willing to show more costly solidarity towards others. In this study, we test pre-registered hypotheses on whether the MARPOR left-right score of voters’ preferred party and left-right self-placement predict more solidarity behaviour. We introduce a novel Extended Solidarity Game to measure costly solidarity behaviour as contributions to compensate for income losses of others in randomly assigned groups. The behavioural instrument allows for simultaneous group interactions and was embedded in online surveys in the party system contexts of Austria, West and East Germany. We find evidence for the predicted ideological differences in solidarity: while the MARPOR left-right score shows only a non-significant effect in the expected direction, left-right self-placement (as well as the CHES scores) show a strong, robust and significant effect. The strength of this relationship is highly context-dependent: in Austria and West Germany, predicted contributions of leftmost participants are about 8 percentage points higher than those of rightmost participants. In East Germany, this predicted difference amounts to about 30 percentage points. Additional analyses rule out differences in social trust, economic or cultural political orientations as alternative explanations for the context-dependency of the effect. We argue that the East German party system – characterised by clearer programmatic party differences and more intense party competition – leads voters to define their ideological position more clearly and increases the behavioural relevance of political ideology.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48188,"journal":{"name":"Electoral Studies","volume":"97 ","pages":"Article 102980"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-14","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/S0261379425000861","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

Voters on the left typically demand more public redistribution than those on the right. While existing research has demonstrated differences in social behaviour by political ideology, we know little on whether left voters are willing to show more costly solidarity towards others. In this study, we test pre-registered hypotheses on whether the MARPOR left-right score of voters’ preferred party and left-right self-placement predict more solidarity behaviour. We introduce a novel Extended Solidarity Game to measure costly solidarity behaviour as contributions to compensate for income losses of others in randomly assigned groups. The behavioural instrument allows for simultaneous group interactions and was embedded in online surveys in the party system contexts of Austria, West and East Germany. We find evidence for the predicted ideological differences in solidarity: while the MARPOR left-right score shows only a non-significant effect in the expected direction, left-right self-placement (as well as the CHES scores) show a strong, robust and significant effect. The strength of this relationship is highly context-dependent: in Austria and West Germany, predicted contributions of leftmost participants are about 8 percentage points higher than those of rightmost participants. In East Germany, this predicted difference amounts to about 30 percentage points. Additional analyses rule out differences in social trust, economic or cultural political orientations as alternative explanations for the context-dependency of the effect. We argue that the East German party system – characterised by clearer programmatic party differences and more intense party competition – leads voters to define their ideological position more clearly and increases the behavioural relevance of political ideology.
左翼选民表现出更多的团结行为吗?来自奥地利、西德和东德互动调查的新行为证据
左派选民通常比右派选民要求更多的公共再分配。虽然现有的研究已经证明了政治意识形态在社会行为上的差异,但我们对左翼选民是否愿意对他人表现出更昂贵的团结却知之甚少。在这项研究中,我们检验了预先登记的假设,即选民首选政党的MARPOR左右得分和左右自我定位是否能预测更多的团结行为。我们引入了一种新颖的扩展团结博弈来衡量代价高昂的团结行为,作为补偿随机分配群体中其他人收入损失的贡献。行为工具允许同时进行群体互动,并嵌入在奥地利,西德和东德政党制度背景下的在线调查中。我们发现了预测的意识形态团结差异的证据:尽管MARPOR左右得分在预期方向上仅显示出不显著的影响,但左右自我定位(以及CHES得分)显示出强烈、稳健和显著的影响。这种关系的强度是高度依赖于环境的:在奥地利和西德,最左边的参与者的预测贡献比最右边的参与者高8个百分点。在东德,这一预测差异约为30个百分点。额外的分析排除了社会信任、经济或文化政治取向的差异作为影响的背景依赖性的替代解释。我们认为,东德政党制度的特点是更明确的政党纲领差异和更激烈的政党竞争,这导致选民更清楚地定义他们的意识形态立场,并增加了政治意识形态的行为相关性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信