如何正确投票

Q3 Social Sciences
Kosta Bovan
{"title":"如何正确投票","authors":"Kosta Bovan","doi":"10.20901/an.19.01","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The concept of correct voting, which refers to a vote that is the same one that would have been made under conditions of full information, has been used to evaluate citizens' voting decisions in various settings. Most studies either focus on determining individual and situational predictors of correct voting or determining the correctness of voting via heuristics. Since heuristics can lead to better decision outcomes than systematic processes, the goal of this study was to analyze how different modes of decision-making strategies, as well as individual and situational characteristics, contribute to correct voting. To answer this question, an experiment was conducted in Croatia, a previously unstudied context for correct voting, in which participants gathered information on four parties in a mock election campaign. Results showed that higher political motivation and usage of compensatory decision-making strategies had a positive impact on the probability of casting a correct vote. However, direct effect of cognitive load was found for participants with low levels of political motivation, for which an increase in cognitive load resulted in 25% less probability of voting correctly.","PeriodicalId":39082,"journal":{"name":"Anali Hrvatskog Politoloskog Drustva","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"How to Vote Correctly\",\"authors\":\"Kosta Bovan\",\"doi\":\"10.20901/an.19.01\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The concept of correct voting, which refers to a vote that is the same one that would have been made under conditions of full information, has been used to evaluate citizens' voting decisions in various settings. Most studies either focus on determining individual and situational predictors of correct voting or determining the correctness of voting via heuristics. Since heuristics can lead to better decision outcomes than systematic processes, the goal of this study was to analyze how different modes of decision-making strategies, as well as individual and situational characteristics, contribute to correct voting. To answer this question, an experiment was conducted in Croatia, a previously unstudied context for correct voting, in which participants gathered information on four parties in a mock election campaign. Results showed that higher political motivation and usage of compensatory decision-making strategies had a positive impact on the probability of casting a correct vote. However, direct effect of cognitive load was found for participants with low levels of political motivation, for which an increase in cognitive load resulted in 25% less probability of voting correctly.\",\"PeriodicalId\":39082,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Anali Hrvatskog Politoloskog Drustva\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Anali Hrvatskog Politoloskog Drustva\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.20901/an.19.01\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Anali Hrvatskog Politoloskog Drustva","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.20901/an.19.01","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

正确投票的概念是指在充分信息的情况下所投的票是相同的,它已被用于评估公民在各种情况下的投票决策。大多数研究要么集中在确定正确投票的个人和情境预测因素,要么通过启发式来确定投票的正确性。由于启发式比系统过程能产生更好的决策结果,本研究的目的是分析不同的决策策略模式以及个人和情境特征如何有助于正确投票。为了回答这个问题,在克罗地亚进行了一项实验,这是一个以前没有研究过正确投票的环境,参与者在模拟竞选活动中收集了四个政党的信息。结果表明,较高的政治动机和补偿性决策策略的使用对正确投票的概率有积极影响。然而,认知负荷对政治动机水平较低的参与者有直接影响,认知负荷的增加导致正确投票的概率降低25%。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
How to Vote Correctly
The concept of correct voting, which refers to a vote that is the same one that would have been made under conditions of full information, has been used to evaluate citizens' voting decisions in various settings. Most studies either focus on determining individual and situational predictors of correct voting or determining the correctness of voting via heuristics. Since heuristics can lead to better decision outcomes than systematic processes, the goal of this study was to analyze how different modes of decision-making strategies, as well as individual and situational characteristics, contribute to correct voting. To answer this question, an experiment was conducted in Croatia, a previously unstudied context for correct voting, in which participants gathered information on four parties in a mock election campaign. Results showed that higher political motivation and usage of compensatory decision-making strategies had a positive impact on the probability of casting a correct vote. However, direct effect of cognitive load was found for participants with low levels of political motivation, for which an increase in cognitive load resulted in 25% less probability of voting correctly.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Anali Hrvatskog Politoloskog Drustva
Anali Hrvatskog Politoloskog Drustva Social Sciences-Sociology and Political Science
CiteScore
0.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
3
审稿时长
40 weeks
×
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