Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-l7hp2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T12:10:22.291Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Behavioral Consequences of Election Outcomes: Evidence From Campaign Contributions

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 March 2018

Nicolas K. Dumas  and
Kyle Shohfi
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Existing research offers competing predictions as to whether election outcomes affect the future political behavior of individual supporters. Drawing on a dataset of millions of donors across thousands of candidates in different races, this study analyzes a series of regression discontinuities to estimate the effect of donating to a barely winning candidate as opposed to a barely losing one. It finds that winning donors were substantially more likely to donate in the future to that same office type. These effects are large and occur even when their original candidate was not up for re-election. The results show that the consequences of election outcomes extend beyond control of a particular seat, and affect the future behavior of ordinary citizens.

Keywords

political donationelectionsregression discontinuity
Type
Articles
Information
British Journal of Political Science , Volume 50 , Issue 2 , April 2020 , pp. 641 - 652
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2018

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

*

Department of Political Science, MIT (email: [email protected]); Sloan School of Business, MIT (email: [email protected]). For their helpful suggestions and feedback, we would like to thank Adam Berinsky, Andrea Campbell, Danny Hidalgo, In Song Kim, Ariel White, Teppei Yamamoto, Justin de Benedictis-Kessner, James Dunham, and Dan de Kadt, as well as participants and discussants in our MPSA Junior Scholar Symposium in 2016. This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellowship under Grant No. 1122374. Data replication sets are available in Harvard Dataverse at https://dx.doi.org/10.7910/DVN/QMBTPP and online at https://doi.org/10.1017/S0007123417000771.

References

Aldrich, J. H., Montgomery, J. M., and Wood, W.. 2011. Turnout as a Habit. Political Behavior 33 (4):535–563.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ansolabehere, S., and Hersh, E.. 2012. Validation: What Big Data Reveal About Survey Misreporting and the Real Electorate. Political Analysis 20:437–459.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bandura, A. 1977. Self-Efficacy: Toward a Unifying Theory of Behavioral Change. Psychological Review 84 (2):191–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barber, M., Butler, D. M., and Preece, J.. 2016. Gender Inequalities in Campaign Finance: A Regression Discontinuity Design. Quarterly Journal of Political Science 11 (2):219–248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bendor, J., Diermeier, D., and Ting, M.. 2003. A Behavioral Model of Turnout. American Political Science Review 97 (2):261–280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berinsky, A. J. 2004. Silent Voices: Public Opinion and Political Participation in America. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Bonica, A. 2013. Database on Ideology, Money in Politics, and Elections: Public Version 1.0 [computer file].Google Scholar
Bonica, A.. 2014. Mapping the Ideological Marketplace. American Journal of Political Science 58 (2):367–386.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Caughey, D., and Sekhon, J. S.. 2011. Elections and the Regression Discontinuity Design: Lessons from Close us House Races, 1942–2008. Political Analysis 19 (4):385–408.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clarke, H. D., and Acock, A. C.. 1989. National Elections and Political Attitudes: The Case of Political Efficacy. British Journal of Political Science 19 (4):551–562.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coppock, A., and Green, D. P.. 2015. Is Voting Habit Forming? New Evidence from Experiments and Regression Discontinuities. American Journal of Political Science 60 (4):1044–1062.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
CQ Press. Voting and Elections Collection. 2018. Available at http://library.cqpress.com/elections/.Google Scholar
Denny, K., and Doyle, O.. 2009. Does Voting History Matter? Analysing Persistence in Turnout. American Journal of Political Science 53 (1):17–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dumas, Nicolas, and Shohfi, Kyle. 2017. Replication Data for: The Behavioral Consequences of Election Outcomes: Evidence from campaign contributions, doi:10.7910/DVN/QMBTPP, Harvard Dataverse, V1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eggers, A. C., Fowler, A., Hainmueller, J., Hall, A. B., and Snyder, J. M.. 2015. On the Validity of the Regression Discontinuity Design for Estimating Electoral Effects: New Evidence from Over 40,000 Close Races. American Journal of Political Science 59 (1):259–274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fowler, A., and Hall, A. B.. 2014. Disentangling the Personal and Partisan Incumbency Advantages: Evidence from Close Elections and Term Limits. Quarterly Journal of Political Science 9 (4):501–531.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fowler, A., and Hall, A. B.. 2017. Long-Term Consequences of Election Results. British Journal of Political Science 47 (2):351–372.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fowler, J. H. 2006. Habitual Voting and Behavioral Turnout. Journal of Politics 68 (2):335–344.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Francia, P. L., Green, J. C., Herrnson, P. S., Powell, L. W., and Wilcox, C.. 2003. The Financiers of Congressional Elections: Investors, Ideologues, and Intimates. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Gerber, A. S., and Green, D. P.. 2012. Field Expriments: Design, Analysis and Interpretation. New York: W.W. Norton.Google Scholar
Gerber, A. S., Green, D. P., and Shachar, R.. 2003. Voting May be Habit-Forming: Evidence from a Randomized Field Experiment. American Journal of Political Science 47 (3):540–550.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Green, D. P., and Shachar, R.. 2000. Habit Formation and Political Behaviour: Evidence of Consuetude in Voter Turnout. British Journal of Political Science 30 (4):561–573.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hainmueller, J., Hall, A. B., and Snyder, J. M.. 2015. Assessing the External Validity of Election RD Estimates: An Investigation of the Incumbency Advantage. Journal of Politics 77 (3):707–720.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hall, A. B., and Snyder, J. M.. 2015. How Much of the Incumbency Advantage is Due to Scare-Off? Political Science Research and Methods 3 (3):493–514.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hill, S. J., and Huber, G. A.. 2017. Representativeness and Motivations of the contemporary Donorate: Results from Merged Survey and Administrative Records. Political Behavior 39 (1):3–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holbein, J. B. 2016. Left behind? Citizen Responsiveness to Government Performance Information. American Political Science Review 110 (2):353–368.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holbein, J. B., and Hillygus, D. S.. 2014. Making Young Voters: The Impact of Preregistration on Youth Turnout. American Journal of Political Science 60 (2):364–382.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Klarner, C., Berry, W. D., Carsey, T., Jewell, M., Niemi, R., Powell, L., and Snyder, J.. 2013. State Legislative Election Returns (1967–2010). hdl:1902.1/20401, Harvard Dataverse, V1, UNF:5:q/n5C9RQGfjy6AjbLG6JWQ==.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kraut, R. E., and McConahay, J. B.. 1973. How Being Interviewed Affects Voting: An Experiment. The Public Opinion Quarterly 37 (3):398–406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lee, D. S. 2008. Randomized Experiments from Non-Random Selection in Us House Elections. Journal of Econometrics 142 (2):675–697.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Madsen, D. 1987. Political Self-Efficacy Tested. American Political Science Review 81 (2):571–581.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meer, J. 2013. The Habit of Giving. Economic Inquiry 51 (4):2002–2017.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meredith, M. 2009. Persistence in Political Participation. Quarterly Journal of Political Science 4 (3):187–209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosenstone, S., and Hansen, J. M.. 1993. Mobilization, Participation and Democracy in America. Basingstoke: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Skinner, E. A. 1996. A Guide to Constructs of Control. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 71 (3):549–570.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Skovron, C., and Titiunik, R.. 2015. A Practical Guide to Regression Discontinuity Designs in Political Science. Technical report. Working Paper, University of Michigan. Available from http://goo.gl/xwLDA5.Google Scholar
Thistlethwaite, D. L., and Campbell, D. T.. 1960. Regression-Discontinuity Analysis: An Alternative to the Ex Post Facto Experiment. Journal of Educational Psychology 51 (6):309–317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Valentino, N. A., Gregorowicz, K., and Groenendyk, E. W.. 2009. Efficacy, Emotions and the Habit of Participation. Political Behavior 31 (3):307–330.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wood, W., and Neal, D. T.. 2007. A New Look at Habits and the Habit-Goal Interface. Psychological Review 114 (4):843–863.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wood, W., Tam, L., and Witt, M. G.. 2005. Changing Circumstances, Disrupting Habits. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 88 (6):918–933.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wooldridge, J. M. 2013. Introductory Econometrics: A Modern Approach. Mason, OH: South-Western Publishing.Google Scholar
Yalch, R. F. 1976. Pre-Election Interview Effects on Voter Turnout. Public Opinion Quarterly 40 (3):331–336.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Supplementary material: Link

Dumas and Shohfi Dataset

Dataset

https://dx.doi.org/10.7910/DVN/QMBTPP
Link
Supplementary material: PDF

Dumas and Shohfi supplementary material

Appendix

Download Dumas and Shohfi supplementary material(PDF)
PDF 1.4 MB