{"title":"Vote choice under certainty, risk, and uncertainty","authors":"Guido Tiemann","doi":"10.1016/j.electstud.2025.102972","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Voters are thought to be repelled by unclear party communication or all-out uncertainty about their ideological or programmatic positions. Our contribution builds on a series of survey experiments in the alternative states of certainty, risk, and uncertainty. Choice under risk occurs, for instance, when electoral platforms transmit blurred or unclear signals. However, the range of potential positions and their respective probabilities is considered common, exogenous knowledge: we find that these scenarios neither attract nor repel voters. In contrast, choice under uncertainty is given when potential outcomes or their respective probabilities are unknown to the voters and require endogenous cognitive abilities and endogenous signal processing: we demonstrate that choice under uncertainty tends to drive away voters. The experimental setup considers both spatial and non-spatial components of voter utility and their contextual conditions to bolster external validity and arrive at more internally and externally valid assessments of vote choice under various “states of nature”.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48188,"journal":{"name":"Electoral Studies","volume":"97 ","pages":"Article 102972"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-16","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/S0261379425000782","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 are thought to be repelled by unclear party communication or all-out uncertainty about their ideological or programmatic positions. Our contribution builds on a series of survey experiments in the alternative states of certainty, risk, and uncertainty. Choice under risk occurs, for instance, when electoral platforms transmit blurred or unclear signals. However, the range of potential positions and their respective probabilities is considered common, exogenous knowledge: we find that these scenarios neither attract nor repel voters. In contrast, choice under uncertainty is given when potential outcomes or their respective probabilities are unknown to the voters and require endogenous cognitive abilities and endogenous signal processing: we demonstrate that choice under uncertainty tends to drive away voters. The experimental setup considers both spatial and non-spatial components of voter utility and their contextual conditions to bolster external validity and arrive at more internally and externally valid assessments of vote choice under various “states of nature”.
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.