IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cpr/ceprdp/12516.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Urbanization Patterns, Information Diffusion And Female Voting In Rural Paraguay

Author

Listed:
  • León-Ciliotta, Gianmarco
  • Chong, Alberto
  • Valdivia, Martin
  • Roza, Vivian
  • Vega, Gabriela

Abstract

We use a field experiment to evaluate the impact of two informational get-out-the-vote (GOTV) campaigns to boost female electoral participation in Paraguay. We find that public rallies have no effect either on registration or on voter turnout in the 2013 presidential elections. However, households that received door-to-door (D2D) treatment are 4.6 percentage points more likely to vote. Experimental variation on the intensity of the treatment at the locality level allows us to estimate spillover effects, which are present in localities that are geographically more concentrated, and thus may favor social interactions. Reinforcement effects to the already treated population are twice as large as diffusion to the untreated. Our results underscore the importance of taking into account urbanization patterns when designing informational campaigns.

Suggested Citation

  • León-Ciliotta, Gianmarco & Chong, Alberto & Valdivia, Martin & Roza, Vivian & Vega, Gabriela, 2017. "Urbanization Patterns, Information Diffusion And Female Voting In Rural Paraguay," CEPR Discussion Papers 12516, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
  • Handle: RePEc:cpr:ceprdp:12516
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://cepr.org/publications/DP12516
    Download Restriction: CEPR Discussion Papers are free to download for our researchers, subscribers and members. If you fall into one of these categories but have trouble downloading our papers, please contact us at subscribers@cepr.org
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version below or search for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Betsy Sinclair & Margaret McConnell & Donald P. Green, 2012. "Detecting Spillover Effects: Design and Analysis of Multilevel Experiments," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 56(4), pages 1055-1069, October.
    2. Gerber, Alan S. & Green, Donald P., 2000. "The Effects of Canvassing, Telephone Calls, and Direct Mail on Voter Turnout: A Field Experiment," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 94(3), pages 653-663, September.
    3. John, Peter & Brannan, Tessa, 2008. "How Different Are Telephoning and Canvassing? Results from a ‘Get Out the Vote’ Field Experiment in the British 2005 General Election," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 38(3), pages 565-574, July.
    4. Braconnier, Céline & Dormagen, Jean-Yves & Pons, Vincent, 2017. "Voter Registration Costs and Disenfranchisement: Experimental Evidence from France," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 111(3), pages 584-604, August.
    5. Nickerson, David W., 2008. "Is Voting Contagious? Evidence from Two Field Experiments," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 102(1), pages 49-57, February.
    6. Alan Gerber & Donald Green, 2001. "Do phone calls increase voter turnout? A field experiment," Natural Field Experiments 00249, The Field Experiments Website.
    7. León, Gianmarco, 2017. "Turnout, political preferences and information: Experimental evidence from Peru," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 56-71.
    8. Rohini Pande, 2011. "Can Informed Voters Enforce Better Governance? Experiments in Low-Income Democracies," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 3(1), pages 215-237, September.
    9. Gerber, Alan S. & Green, Donald P. & Larimer, Christopher W., 2008. "Social Pressure and Voter Turnout: Evidence from a Large-Scale Field Experiment," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 102(1), pages 33-48, February.
    10. Fafchamps, Marcel & Vicente, Pedro C., 2013. "Political violence and social networks: Experimental evidence from a Nigerian election," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 27-48.
    11. Alan Gerber & Donald Green, 2000. "The effects of canvassing, direct mail, and telephone contact on voter turnout: A field experiment," Natural Field Experiments 00248, The Field Experiments Website.
    12. Alan Gerber & Donald Green & Ron Shachar, 2003. "Voting may be habit forming: Evidence from a randomized field experiment," Natural Field Experiments 00251, The Field Experiments Website.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Mariella Gonzales & Gianmarco León-Ciliotta & Luis R. Martínez, 2022. "How Effective Are Monetary Incentives to Vote? Evidence from a Nationwide Policy," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 14(1), pages 293-326, January.
    2. León, Gianmarco, 2017. "Turnout, political preferences and information: Experimental evidence from Peru," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 56-71.
    3. Elisa Mougin, 2021. "Three essays in the political economy of information [Trois essais en économie politique de l’information]," SciencePo Working papers Main tel-03537938, HAL.
    4. Zucco, Cesar & Lenz, Anna-Katharina & Goldszmidt, Rafael & Valdivia, Martin, 2020. "Face-to-face vs. virtual assistance to entrepreneurs: Evidence from a field experiment in Brazil," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 188(C).
    5. Velásquez, Daniel & Medina, Santiago & Yamada, Gustavo & Lavado, Pablo & Nunez-del-Prado, Miguel & Alatrista-Salas, Hugo & Morzán, Juandiego, 2020. "I read the news today, oh boy: The effect of crime news coverage on crime perception," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 136(C).
    6. Mougin, Elisa, 2024. "TV in times of political uncertainty: Evidence from the 2017 elections in Kenya," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 166(C).
    7. Hodler, Roland & Ahmed, Firoz & Islam, Asad, 2020. "Voting or abstaining in "managed" elections? A field experiment in Bangladesh," CEPR Discussion Papers 14608, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    8. Elisa Mougin, 2021. "Three essays in the political economy of information [Trois essais en économie politique de l’information]," SciencePo Working papers tel-03537938, HAL.
    9. Firoz Ahmed & Roland Hodler & Asad Islam, 2024. "Partisan Effects of Information Campaigns in Competitive Authoritarian Elections: Evidence from Bangladesh," The Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 134(660), pages 1303-1330.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Alberto Chong & Gianmarco León & Vivian Roza & Martin Valdivia & Gabriela Vega, 2017. "Urbanization patterns, social interactions and female voting in rural Paraguay," Economics Working Papers 1589, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra.
    2. León, Gianmarco, 2017. "Turnout, political preferences and information: Experimental evidence from Peru," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 56-71.
    3. Xavier Giné & Ghazala Mansuri, 2018. "Together We Will: Experimental Evidence on Female Voting Behavior in Pakistan," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 10(1), pages 207-235, January.
    4. LeRoux Kelly & Langer Julie & Plotner Samantha, 2023. "Nonprofit Messaging and the 2020 Election: Findings from a Nonpartisan Get-Out-The-Vote (GOTV) Field Experiment," Nonprofit Policy Forum, De Gruyter, vol. 14(2), pages 157-183, April.
    5. Grácio, Matilde & Vicente, Pedro C., 2021. "Information, get-out-the-vote messages, and peer influence: Causal effects on political behavior in Mozambique," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).
    6. Vincenzo Galasso & Tommaso Nannicini, 2016. "Persuasion and Gender: Experimental Evidence from Two Political Campaigns," CESifo Working Paper Series 5868, CESifo.
    7. Galasso, Vincenzo & Nannicini, Tommaso, 2016. "Persuasion and Gender: Experimental Evidence from Two Political Campaigns," CEPR Discussion Papers 11238, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    8. Nunnari, Salvatore & Galasso, Vincenzo & Nannicini, Tommaso, 2020. "Positive Spillovers from Negative Campaigning," CEPR Discussion Papers 14312, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    9. Pereira dos Santos, João & Tavares, José & Vicente, Pedro C., 2021. "Can ATMs get out the vote? Evidence from a nationwide field experiment," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 134(C).
    10. Vincenzo Galasso & Tommaso Nannicini, 2013. "Men Vote in Mars, Women Vote in Venus: A Survey Experiment in the Field," CESifo Working Paper Series 4328, CESifo.
    11. Valentina A. Bali & Lindon J. Robison & Richard Winder, 2020. "What Motivates People to Vote? The Role of Selfishness, Duty, and Social Motives When Voting," SAGE Open, , vol. 10(4), pages 21582440209, October.
    12. Bhatt, Rachana & Dechter, Evgenia & Holden, Richard, 2020. "Registration costs and voter turnout," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 176(C), pages 91-104.
    13. Chad Kendall & Tommaso Nannicini & Francesco Trebbi, 2015. "How Do Voters Respond to Information? Evidence from a Randomized Campaign," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 105(1), pages 322-353, January.
    14. Gerry Stoker, 2010. "Exploring the Promise of Experimentation in Political Science: Micro‐Foundational Insights and Policy Relevance," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 58(2), pages 300-319, March.
    15. Koay Hean Wei & Khairiah Salwa Mokhtar, 2021. "The Role of Communication in the Process of Forming Market-Oriented Party (Mop): Its Importance and Approaches," Journal of Education and Vocational Research, AMH International, vol. 12(1), pages 57-66.
    16. Pedro Robalo, 2021. "Political Mobilization in the Laboratory: The Role of Norms and Communication," Games, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-40, March.
    17. Sheely, Ryan, 2015. "Mobilization, Participatory Planning Institutions, and Elite Capture: Evidence from a Field Experiment in Rural Kenya," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 251-266.
    18. J. Ryan Lamare, 2016. "Labor Unions and Political Mobilization: Diminishing Returns of Repetitious Contact," Industrial Relations: A Journal of Economy and Society, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 55(2), pages 346-374, April.
    19. Donald P. Green & Jennifer K. Smith, 2003. "Professionalization of Campaigns and the Secret History of Collective Action Problems," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 15(3), pages 321-339, July.
    20. Julia Cage & Edgard Dewitte, 2021. "It Takes Money to Make MPs: Evidence from 150 Years of British Campaign Spending," SciencePo Working papers Main hal-03384143, HAL.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Voter behavior; Electoral politics; Urbanization; Spillover effects; Paraguay;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • O10 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Development - - - General
    • D72 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Political Processes: Rent-seeking, Lobbying, Elections, Legislatures, and Voting Behavior
    • O53 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economywide Country Studies - - - Asia including Middle East
    • D71 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Social Choice; Clubs; Committees; Associations

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:cpr:ceprdp:12516. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cepr.org .

    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.