IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/anname/v601y2005i1p180-191.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

What We Should Know about the Effectiveness of Campaigns but Don’t

Author

Listed:
  • Peter Levine

    (CIRCLE, the Center for Information and Research on Civic Learning and Engagement)

  • Mark Hugo Lopez

    (CIRCLE, University of Maryland’s School of Public Affairs)

Abstract

It would be useful as well as interesting to understand more about why people decide to vote. The theoretical literature suggests that they weigh the costs and benefits of voting and also consider the moral obligation to participate. Relevant empirical evidence comes from surveys, comparisons of states with differing laws and electoral processes, and randomized field studies of voter mobilization efforts. The randomized experiments are by far the most rigorous sources, and they have yielded some insights about why people choose to vote or not to vote. However, much remains to be investigated, and this article provides a research agenda.

Suggested Citation

  • Peter Levine & Mark Hugo Lopez, 2005. "What We Should Know about the Effectiveness of Campaigns but Don’t," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 601(1), pages 180-191, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:anname:v:601:y:2005:i:1:p:180-191
    DOI: 10.1177/0002716205278340
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0002716205278340
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0002716205278340?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:anname:v:601:y:2005:i:1:p:180-191. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.