Kaat Smets

A Widening Generational Divide? The Age Gap in Voter Turnout Through Time and Space

This research departs from the observation in the literature that some countries, such as Canada, Great Britain and the United States, in recent years witness a widening of the gap in turnout between younger and older citizens. Based on election study data from ten countries this article shows that the trend toward a widening generational divide is not observed in all Western democracies and that over-time trends in the age gap as a matter of fact are decidedly varied. In an attempt to explain over-time patterns and between-country differences, this research focuses on changing societal characteristics and changes in characteristics of elections. More specifically, the idea that over-time variation in the transition to adulthood has been overlooked as an explanation of declining turnout levels among young voters takes a central place. The findings indicate that delayed transitions to adulthood lead to increased divergence in turnout levels between younger and older voters. Characteristics of elections, measured through indicators of electoral saliency, are not found to have a significant impact on trends in the age gap in voter turnout.

The role of deliberation in attitude change: An empirical assessment of three theoretical mechanisms

Though the impact of deliberative polling on attitude change has received ample attention in the literature, micro models of attitude change before, during, and after deliberation are understudied. The relative strength of three competing views of the way attitudes change—the heuristics, systematic, and deliberative models—is assessed, using the quasi-experimental data of the EuroPolis deliberative project and comparing a group of people who participated in the deliberative poll with a control group. The results are: (1) in line with the systematic model, predispositions play a larger role than in the heuristics or deliberative models; (2) predispositions play a different role for participants and nonparticipants; (3) predispositions shape attitude formation in different ways depending on the issue at hand. On some issues the beliefs of participants change as a consequence of deliberation and become more complex and nuanced than before. This is, however, not the case for immigration issues where deliberation seems to strengthen predispositions.

Revisiting the political life-cycle model: later maturation and turnout decline among young adults

Turnout among young adults has declined steadily in various advanced industrial democracies in recent decades. At the same time, as a consequence of delayed transitions to adulthood, many life-cycle events considered important for the development of electoral participation are experienced later in life. These combined trends call for a revaluation of the political life-cycle model and the way in which it explains voter turnout among young adults. More specifically, in this paper it is argued that variation in the timing of life events has been overlooked as an explanatory factor of generational differences in young adults’ propensity to turn out to vote. With accumulating evidence that the decision to vote is to some extent habitual, a lack of life experiences may cause young adults to form the habit to abstain rather than to vote. If the mechanisms of the life-cycle model are indeed correct, later maturation should at least partially explain why young adults these days are less inclined to vote than their parents or grandparents in their younger years. Based on the British Election Studies from 1964 to 2010, the findings of this study confirm generally observed patterns of a delayed assumption of adult roles by young citizens. This trend toward later maturation negatively affects turnout levels of young citizens. If maturation levels had remained at pre-war levels, the average turnout among Britain’s post-seventies generation would have been no less than 12 percentage points higher.

Revealing preferences: does deliberation increase ideological awareness among the less well educated?

Research suggests that the rightist discourse on immigration appeals to left-leaning citizens with lower levels of education. The opposite is, however, not true for right-wing voters with lower educational levels, and this asymmetry leaves left-wing parties at a disadvantage compared with the right on immigration and integration issues. Deliberative theory promises that discussion, information and reflection can promote a more balanced political discussion and a more enlightened citizen. This article assesses the extent to which deliberative polling increases the ideological awareness of citizens with lower educational levels. More specifically, it gauges the extent to which especially less well educated left-wing voters � those whose attitudes research finds to be particularly out of tune with their ideological predispositions regarding immigration and integration � adjust their attitudes as a consequence of deliberate exposure to informational input and the presentation of two-sided arguments. Use is made of unique data generated during the first European-wide deliberative polling project, �EuroPolis�, held in 2009. The results indicate that less well educated left-wing voters indeed have slightly more negative attitudes towards immigrants than leftist voters with secondary or post-secondary educational levels. Turning to the micro-mechanisms of attitude change in a deliberative setting, the analyses show that both levels of education and ideological predispositions play a role in the extent to which participants of the deliberative poll adjust their attitudes. In three out of four models, evidence is found that less well educated left-leaning citizens are indeed most likely to adjust their attitudes on immigration and integration after being presented with a more balanced discussion of the topic.

Meta-analysis: why do citizens vote (or abstain) in national elections

The question why people choose to vote or abstain in national elections has been extensively researched in the past decades. Yet, disagreement over what drives citizens to the polls persists. Literally, over a 100 different explanatory factors have been linked to the individuals decision to vote or abstain: ranging from individual characteristics like education, age and political interest, to socialization by friends and parents, to characteristics of the election-like political competition, and many more. Slowly, but surely, it has become difficult to see the wood for the trees. In the research project that we describe in this article, we wanted to take a step back and summarize where we stand and what we know about turnout. To this end, we carried out a meta-analysis of 90 empirical studies of individual-level voter turnout in national elections between 2000 and 2010. This allowed us to identify which variables are consistently linked to turnout, and which are not. In this article, we describe what meta-analysis is and give an example of how to carry out meta-analysis by describing our research project on turnout.