More interest in interest: Does poll coverage help or hurt efforts to make more young voters show up at the ballot box?
| Published date | 01 September 2019 |
| Date | 01 September 2019 |
| Author | Sjoerd B Stolwijk,Andreas RT Schuck |
| DOI | 10.1177/1465116519837351 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
Article
More interest in interest:
Does poll coverage help
or hurt efforts to make
more young voters show
up at the ballot box?
Sjoerd B Stolwijk
Department of Political Science and Public Administration,
Vrije Universiteit (VU) Amsterdam, Amsterdam,
The Netherlands
Andreas RT Schuck
Department of Communication Science, University
of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Abstract
Turnout in second-order elections, like those for the European Parliament, is notori-
ously low, especially among younger voters. This study compares five pathways in which
exposure to poll coverage can affect turnout: bandwagon voting, strategic turnout,
increased information efficacy, campaign cynicism and perceived electoral importance.
The mediation analyses are combined with Covariate Balancing Propensity Score
matching to better account for selection effects. Analyses of a four-wave panel
survey of young voters (N ¼747) in the 2014 European Parliament Election show
that exposure to polls in election coverage predominantly stimulates interest and turn-
out among young voters. This is in line with the perspective that poll coverage increases
perceived electoral importance. Poll coverage can thus play a beneficial role in activating
the potential among young voters to engage with (second-order) elections.
Keywords
Matching, media effects, political interest, public opinion polls, turnout
Corresponding author:
Andreas RT Schuck, Amsterdam School of Communication Research (ASCoR), University of Amsterdam,
Nieuwe Achtergracht 166, 1018 WV Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Email: a.r.t.schuck@uva.nl
European Union Politics
2019, Vol. 20(3) 341–360
!The Author(s) 2019
Article reuse guidelines:
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/1465116519837351
journals.sagepub.com/home/eup
Poll coverage and young voter turnout
Declining turnout rates of young voters are a growing concern both in the aca-
demic literature and in political debates (see Phelps, 2005). Habit plays an impor-
tant role in determining turnout, so starting that habit to vote at one’s first election
is important for future electoral participation (Cutts et al., 2009; Franklin, 2001;
Plutzer, 2002). Nowadays, poll coverage is a major part of media reporting of
election campaigns, but its role in either mobilizing or demobilizing participation
is a controversial one. It has been criticized for portraying elections as a horse race
or game, and turning off voters over time by making them cynical about the
political process (Cappella and Jamieson, 1997). However, the ‘virtuous circle’
literature argues instead that exposure to campaign coverage draws potential
voters into more engagement with the campaign (Norris, 2000). For younger
voters, this initial step to engagement may be especially important. This article
will take a step back and compare five different pathways in which poll coverage
might affect young voter interest and turnout, in order to answer the question:
Does poll coverage help or hurt efforts to make more young voters show up at the
ballot box?
The first pathway supposes that polls provide substantive information in and of
themselves about likely election winners and losers. Young voters might use this
information as a cue for bandwagon voting (Hardmeier, 2008). Polls enable them to
anticipate the gratification of voting for the winner, which entices them to get
involved in the campaign. The second pathway is that voters might use poll infor-
mation for a strategic turnout decision (Clarke et al., 2002; Downs, 1957). For such
voters, turnout will be depressed when they support a winning party. If the out-
come will be as desired, then why pay the cost of voting? The third pathway is that
the experience of engaging with poll information might enhance a feeling of infor-
mation efficacy, i.e. that one has the ability to understand the information provided
in the campaign sufficiently to influence the political process (cf. Kaid et al., 2007).
Poll information is relatively easy to understand, and, through increased informa-
tion efficacy, might be a stepping stone into further engagement with the cam-
paign. The fourth pathway is that interpreting poll coverage might implicitly instill
an image of self-interested politicians in the minds of voters, since poll coverage
emphasizes personal winners and losers, rather than substantive issues (Cappella
and Jamieson, 1997). Consequentially, exposure would increase cynicism and
depress turnout. Finally, for the fifth pathway, we propose that poll coverage
will (also) implicitly convey the message that it matters who wins the election.
The increased perceived importance of the election may induce voters to find out
more about what’s at stake, increase interest and engagement with the campaign
and thereby their probability to turn out to vote.
This study evaluates the effect of poll exposure on turnout for young voters in
the 2014 European Parliament (EP) election. It contributes theoretically by empha-
sizing the role of campaign interest within several of the mechanisms discussed
342 European Union Politics 20(3)
To continue reading
Request your trial