Weitere Artikel dieser Ausgabe durch Wischen aufrufen
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
A century ago, Progressive reformers in the U.S. introduced the institutional innovations of direct democracy, claiming these reforms would cultivate better citizens. Two decades of high-profile research have supported and challenged the relationship between direct democracy, increased attention to politics, and a higher turnout rate. We propose, however, that a necessary condition of the “educative effects” model is voter familiarity with initiatives and referendums. While some research has examined ballot measure awareness, we suspect that that the standard measurements—e.g., “Have you heard of Proposition X?”—overestimate actual knowledge. Specifically, we measure ballot measure knowledge in a manner requiring voters to demonstrate familiarity with specific measures rather than merely asserting broad familiarity. Our approach reveals that the public’s awareness of statewide ballot measures, both in the abstract and with respect to particular measures, is far lower than past research suggests. Importantly, it also reveals that people with high levels of education, political interest, and knowledge of national politics are the most likely to misrepresent their ballot measure awareness.
Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten
Sie möchten Zugang zu diesem Inhalt erhalten? Dann informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:
Benz, M., & Stutzer, A. (2004). Are voters better informed when they have a larger say in politics? Public Choice, 119, 31–59. CrossRef
Berelson, B. R., Lazarsfeld, P. F., & McPhee, W. N. (1954). Voting: a study of opinion formulation in a presidential campaign. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Biggers, D. R. (2011). When ballot issues matter: social issue ballot measures and their impact on turnout. Political Behavior, 33, 3–25. CrossRef
Biggers, D. R. (2012). Can a social issue proposition increase political knowledge? Campaign learning and the educative effects of direct democracy. American Politics Research, 40(6), 998–1025. CrossRef
Biggers, D. R. (2014). Morality at the ballot: Direct democracy and political engagement in the United States. New York: Cambridge University Press. CrossRef
Boehmke, F. J., & Michael Alvarez, R. (2014). The influence of initiative signature-gathering campaigns on political participation. Social Science Quarterly, 95, 165–183. CrossRef
Boudreau, C., & MacKenzie, S. A. (2014). Informing the electorate? How party cues and policy information affect public opinion about initiatives. American Journal of Political Science, 58, 48–62. CrossRef
Bowler, S., & Donovan, T. (1994). Information and opinion change on ballot propositions. Political Behavior, 16(4), 411–435. CrossRef
Bowler, S., & Donovan, T. (1998). Demanding choices: Opinion, voting, and direct democracy. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. CrossRef
Bowler, S., & Donovan, T. (2002). Democracy, institutions, and attitudes about citizen influence on government. British Journal of Political Science, 32, 371–390. CrossRef
Burnett, C. M., & Kogan, V. (2012). Familiar choices: Reconsidering institutional effects of the direct initiative. State Politics and Policy Quarterly, 12, 204–224. CrossRef
Burnett, C. M., & Kogan, V. (2015). When does ballot language influence voter choices? Evidence from a survey experiment. Political Communication, 31, 109–126. CrossRef
Burnett, C. M., & Parry, J. A. (2014). Gubernatorial endorsements and ballot measure approval. State Politics and Policy Quarterly, 14, 178–195. CrossRef
Childers, M., & Binder, M. (2012). Engaged by the initiative? How the use of citizen initiatives increases voter turnout. Political Research Quarterly, 65, 93–103. CrossRef
DeBell, M. (2013). Harder than it looks: Coding political knowledge on the ANES”. Political Analysis, 21, 393–406. CrossRef
Donovan, T., Tolbert, C. J., & Smith, D. A. (2009). Political engagement, mobilization and direct democracy. Public Opinion Quarterly, 73, 98–118. CrossRef
Delli Carpini, M. X., & Keeter, S. (1993). Measuring political knowledge: Putting first things first. American Journal of Political Science, 37, 1179–1206. CrossRef
Delli Carpini, M. X., & Keeter, S. (1996). What Americans know about politics and why it matters. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Dyck, J., & Lascher, E. (2009). Direct democracy and political efficacy reconsidered. Political Behavior, 31, 401–427. CrossRef
Dyck, J. J., & Seabrook, N. R. (2010). Mobilized by direct democracy: short-term versus long-term effects and the geography of turnout in ballot measure elections. Social Science Quarterly, 91, 188–208. CrossRef
Everson, D. (1981). The effects of initiatives on voter turnout: A comparative state analysis. Western Political Quarterly, 34, 415–425. CrossRef
Feig, D. G. (2007). Race, roll-off, and the straight-ticket option. Politics & Policy, 35, 548–568. CrossRef
Geer, J. G. (1988). What do open-ended questions measure? Public Opinion Quarterly, 52, 565–571. CrossRef
Goebel, T. (2002). A government by the people: Direct democracy in America, 1890–1940. Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Press.
Kousser, T., & McCubbins, M. (2005). Social choice, crypto-initiatives, and policymaking by direct democracy. Southern California Law Review, 78, 949–984.
Lewis-Beck, M. S., Jacoby, W. G., Norpoth, H., & Weisberg, H. F. (2008). The American voter revisited. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. CrossRef
Lodge, M., & Taber, C. S. (2013). The rationalizing voter. New York: Cambridge University Press. CrossRef
Lupia, A. (2006). How elitism undermines the study of voter competence. Critical Review, 18, 217–232. CrossRef
Lupia, A., & Matsusaka, J. (2004). Direct democracy: New approaches to old questions. Annual Review of Political Science, 7, 463–482. CrossRef
Lyons, J., Jaeger, W. P., & Wolak, J. (2012). The roots of citizens’ knowledge of state politics. State Politics & Policy Quarterly, 13, 183–202. CrossRef
Magleby, D. (1984). Direct legislation: Voting on ballot propositions in the United States. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
Mendelsohn, M., & Cutler, F. (2000). The effect of referendums on democratic citizens: Information, politicization, efficacy and tolerance. British Journal of Political Science, 30, 685–698. CrossRef
Mondak, J. J. (2001). Developing valid knowledge scales. American Journal of Political Science, 45, 224–238. CrossRef
Mondak, J. J., & Davis, B. C. (2001). Asked and answered: Knowledge levels when we will not take “don’t know” for an answer. Political Behavior, 23, 199–224. CrossRef
Nicholson, S. (2003). The political environment and ballot proposition awareness. American Journal of Political Science, 47, 403–410. CrossRef
Nicholson, S. (2005). Voting the agenda: Candidates elections and ballot propositions. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Oppenheimer, D., & Edwards, M. (2012). Democracy despite itself: Why a system that shouldn’t work at all works so well. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. CrossRef
Parry, J. A., Smith, D. A., & Henry, S. (2012). The impact of petition signing on voter turnout. Political Behavior, 34, 117–136. CrossRef
Reilly, S., & Richey, S. (2011). Ballot question readability and roll-off: The impact of language complexity. Political Research Quarterly, 64, 59–67. CrossRef
Robison, J. (2015). Who knows? Question format and political knowledge. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 27, 1–21. CrossRef
Schlozman, D., & Yohai, I. (2008). How initiatives don’t always make citizens: Ballot initiatives in the American States, 1978–2004. Political Behavior, 30, 469–489. CrossRef
Seabrook, N. R., Dyck, J. J., & Lascher, E. L. (2015). Do ballot initiatives increase general political knowledge? Political Behavior, 37, 279–307. CrossRef
Selb, P. (2008). Supersized votes: Ballot length, uncertainty, and choice in direct legislation elections. Public Choice, 135, 319–336. CrossRef
Smith, M. A. (2001). The contingent effects of ballot initiatives and candidate races on turnout. American Journal of Political Science, 45, 700–706. CrossRef
Smith, M. A. (2002). Ballot initiatives and the democratic citizen. The Journal of Politics, 64, 892–903. CrossRef
Smith, D. A., & Tolbert, C. (2004). Educated by initiative: The effects of direct democracy on citizens and political organizations. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. CrossRef
Smith, D. A., & Tolbert, C. (2007). The instrumental and educative effects of ballot measures: Research on direct democracy in the American States. State Politics and Policy Quarterly, 7, 416–445. CrossRef
Smith, D. A., & Tolbert, C. (2010). Direct democracy, public opinion, and candidate choice. Public Opinion Quarterly, 74, 85–108. CrossRef
Tolbert, C. J., Grummel, J., & Smith, D. A. (2001). The effect of ballot initiatives on voter turnout in the American States. American Politics Research, 29, 625–648. CrossRef
Tolbert, C., McNeal, R. S., & Smith, D. A. (2003). Enhancing civic engagement: The effect of direct democracy on political participation and knowledge. State Politics and Policy Quarterly, 3, 23–41. CrossRef
Tolbert, C. J., & Smith, D. A. (2005). The educative effects of ballot initiatives on voter turnout. American Politics Research, 33, 283–309. CrossRef
- Direct Democracy, Educative Effects, and the (Mis)Measurement of Ballot Measure Awareness
Craig M. Burnett
- Springer US
Print ISSN: 0190-9320
Elektronische ISSN: 1573-6687
Neuer Inhalt/© Stellmach, Neuer Inhalt/© Maturus, Pluta Logo/© Pluta, digitale Transformation/© Maksym Yemelyanov | Fotolia