Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dsjbd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T01:15:48.180Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Information Behavior and Political Preferences

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 March 2017

Konstantin Vössing  and
Till Weber
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This article shows that citizens consider policy positions for the formation of their political preferences when they actively seek and find high-quality information, while they dismiss passively acquired and low-quality information. The study develops an extended theory of information and political preferences that incorporates the process of information acquisition and its connection with information quality. A novel experimental design separates the effects on political preferences due to information behavior as an activity from those due to selective exposure to information. The study applies this design in a laboratory experiment with a diverse group of participants using the example of issue voting and European integration in the context of the 2014 European Parliament elections.

Keywords

informationinformation behaviorinformation qualitypolitical preferencesvoting behaviorexperiment
Type
Articles
Information
British Journal of Political Science , Volume 49 , Issue 2 , April 2019 , pp. 533 - 556
Copyright
© Cambridge University Press 2017 

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

*

Humboldt University Berlin, Institute of Social and Political Sciences (email: [email protected]); Baruch College, City University of New York (email: [email protected]). We are grateful for having had the opportunity to present our research at the Montréal voting experiments workshop, the MPSA Conference 2014, a workshop at the Center for European Studies at Harvard University and the Comparative Politics Research Workshop at Humboldt University Berlin. Thanks for helpful comments go in particular to our discussants Richard Lau and Christopher Lawrence, as well as three anonymous reviewers, the editors of this journal and Diana Burlacu. Friederike Talbot provided excellent research assistance and feedback. We also benefited from valuable feedback from our pre-testers, Nicoleta Bazgan, Steffen Beigang, Pauline Defant, Dominik Duell, Cosima Ingenschay, Dorina Kalkum, Thomas Maruhn, Jochen Rehmert, Birgit Reinhold, Marc Reinhold, Carina Schmitt and Marcel Skaun. Konstantin Vössing gratefully acknowledges support from the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (German research foundation), grant number VO 1990/1-1. Data replication sets are available at http://dataverse.harvard.edu/dataverse/BJPolS and online appendices are available at http://dx.doi.org/doi:10.1017/S0007123416000600.

References

Alvarez, Michael, Levin, Ines, Mair, Peter, and Trechsel, Alexander. 2014. Party Preferences in the Digital Age: The Impact of Voting Advice Applications. Party Politics 20 (2):227–236.Google Scholar
Arceneaux, Kevin, and Johnson, Martin. 2013. Changing Minds or Changing Channels? Partisan News in an Age of Choice. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Areni, Charles, and Lutz, Richard. 1988. The Role of Argument Quality in the Elaboration Likelihood Model. Advances in Consumer Research 15:197–203.Google Scholar
Atkinson, Richard. 1972. Ingredients for a Theory of Instruction. American Psychologist 27 (10):921–931.Google Scholar
Bates, Marcia. 2002. Toward an Integrated Model of Information Seeking and Searching. New Review of Information Behaviour Research 3:1–15.Google Scholar
Bell, Bradford, and Kozlowski, Steve. 2008. Active Learning: Effects of Core Training Design Elements on Self-Regulatory Processes, Learning, and Adaptability. Journal of Applied Psychology 93 (2):296–316.Google Scholar
Bruner, Jerome, Goodnow, Jacqueline, and Austin, George. 1956. A Study of Thinking. London: Chapman and Hall.Google Scholar
Case, Donald. 2007. Looking for Information: A Survey of Research on Information Seeking, Needs, and Behavior. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
De Vries, Catherine, van der Brug, Wouter, van Egmond, Marcel, and van der Eijk, Cees. 2011. Individual and Contextual Variation in EU Issue Voting: The Role of Political Information. Electoral Studies 30:16–28.Google Scholar
Dinas, Elias, and Pardos-Prado, Sergi. 2012. A Hidden Giant? Exploring the Centrifugal Dynamics of Attitudes Towards the European Unification. Acta Politica 47 (4):378–399.10.1057/ap.2012.13Google Scholar
Downs, Anthony. 1957. An Economic Theory of Democracy. New York: Harper.Google Scholar
Druckman, James, Fein, Jordan, and Leeper, Thomas. 2012. A Source of Bias in Public Opinion Stability. American Political Science Review 106 (2):430–454.Google Scholar
Gaines, Brian, and Kuklinski, James. 2011. Experimental Estimation of Heterogeneous Treatment Effects Related to Self-Selection. American Journal of Political Science 55 (3):724–736.Google Scholar
Harman, Karin, Humphrey, Keith, and Goodale, Melvyn. 1999. Active Manual Control of Object Views Facilitates Visual Recognition. Current Biology 9:1315–2118.Google Scholar
Hix, Simon, and Lord, Christopher. 1997. Political Parties in the European Union. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Hobolt, Sara, and Wittrock, Jill. 2011. The Second-Order Election Model Revisited: An Experimental Test of Vote Choices in European Parliament Elections. Electoral Studies 30:29–40.10.1016/j.electstud.2010.09.020Google Scholar
Hooghe, Liesbet, and Marks, Gary. 1999. The Making of a Polity: The Struggle Over European Integration. In Continuity and Change in Contemporary Capitalism, edited by Herbert Kitschelt, Peter Lange, Gary Marks and John Stephens, 70–97. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hurwitz, Jon, and Peffley, Mark. 2005. Playing the Race Card in the Post-Willie Horton Era. The Impact of Racialized Code Words on Support for Punitive Crime Policy. Public Opinion Quarterly 69 (1):99–112.Google Scholar
Imbens, Guido. 2000. The Role of the Propensity Score in Estimating Dose-Response Functions. Biometrika 87 (3):706–710.Google Scholar
Iyengar, Shanto, Peters, Mark, and Kinder, Donald. 1982. Experimental Demonstrations of the ‘Not-So-Minimal’ Consequences of Television News Programs. American Political Science Review 76 (4):848–858.Google Scholar
Johnson, David. 1997. Cancer-Related Information Seeking. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.Google Scholar
Kinder, Donald. 2003. Communication and Politics in the Age of Information. In Oxford Handbook of Political Psychology, edited by David O. Sears, Leonie Huddy and Robert Jervis, 357–393. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Klapper, Joseph. 1960. The Effects of Mass Communications. Glencoe, IL: Free Press.Google Scholar
Lenz, Gabriel. 2009. Learning and Opinion Change, Not Priming: Reconsidering the Priming Hypothesis. American Journal of Political Science 53 (4):821–837.Google Scholar
Leotti, Lauren, Iyengar, Sheena, and Oshsner, Kevin. 2010. Born to Choose: The Origins and Value of the Need for Control. Trends Cognitive Science 14:457–463.Google Scholar
Markant, Douglas, DuBrow, Sarah, Davachi, Lila, and Gureckis, Todd. 2014. Deconstructing the Effect of Self-Directed Study on Episodic Memory. Memory and Cognition 42 (8):1211–1224.Google Scholar
Markant, Douglas, and Gureckis, Todd. 2013. Is It Better to Select or to Receive? Learning Via Active and Passive Hypothesis Testing. Journal of Experimental Psychology 143 (1):94–122.Google Scholar
McGuire, William. 1985. Attitudes and Attitude Change. In Handbook of Social Psychology, 3rd Edition, Vol. 2, edited by Gardner Lindzey and Elliot Aronson, 233–346. New York: Random House.Google Scholar
Paas, Fred, Renkl, Alexander, and Sweller, John. 2004. Cognitive Load Theory: Instructional Implications of the Interaction Between Information Structures and Cognitive Architecture. Instructional Science 32:1–8.Google Scholar
Petty, Richard, and Cacioppo, John. 1986. The Elaboration Likelihood Model of Persuasion. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology 19:123–205.Google Scholar
Rabinowitz, George, and Macdonald, Stuart Elaine. 1989. A Directional Theory of Issue Voting. American Political Science Review 83 (1):93–121.Google Scholar
Reif, Karlheinz, and Schmitt, Herrmann. 1980. Nine Second-Order National Elections: A Conceptual Framework for the Analysis of European Election Results. European Journal of Political Research 81:3–45.Google Scholar
Rosenbaum, Paul, and Rubin, Donald. 1983. The Central Role of the Propensity Score in Observational Studies for Causal Effects. Biometrika 70 (1):41–55.Google Scholar
Sobel, David, and Kushnir, Tamar. 2006. The Importance of Decision Making in Causal Learning from Interventions. Memory and Cognition 34 (2):411–419.Google Scholar
Steenbergen, Marco, Bächtiger, André, Spörndli, Markus, and Steiner, Jürg. 2003. Measuring Political Deliberation: A Discourse Quality Index. Comparative European Politics 1 (1):21–48.Google Scholar
Stroud, Natalie. 2008. Media Use and Political Predispositions: Revisiting the Concept of Selective Exposure. Political Behavior 30 (3):341–366.Google Scholar
Sunstein, Cass. 2001. Republic.com. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Tilley, James, and Wlezien, Christopher. 2008. Does Political Information Matter? An Experimental Test Relating to Party Positions on Europe. Political Studies 56:192–214.Google Scholar
Van der Brug, Wouter, and van der Eijk, Cees. 1999. The Cognitive Basis of Voting. In Political Representation and Legitimacy in the European Union, edited by Hermann Schmitt and Jacques Thomassen, 129–160. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Van der Brug, Wouter, Franklin, Mark, and Tóka, Gábor. 2008. One Electorate or Many? Differences in Party Preference Formation Between New and Established European Democracies. Electoral Studies 27 (4):589–600.Google Scholar
Van der Eijk, Cees, and Franklin, Mark. 2004. Potential for Contestation on European Matters at National Elections in Europe. In European Integration and Political Conflict, edited by Gary Marks and Marco Steenbergen, 32–50. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Van der Eijk, Cees, van der Brug, Wouter, Kroh, Martin, and Franklin, Mark. 2006. Rethinking the Dependent Variable in Voting Behavior: On the Measurement and Analysis of Electoral Utilities. Electoral Studies 25 (3):424–447.Google Scholar
Vassil, Kristjan. 2011. Role of Self Selection in Estimating the Effects of Voting Advice Applications: Empirical Evidence on the Basis of Swiss Smartvote Data. 6th ECPR General Conference, Reykjavik, 25–27 August.Google Scholar
Voss, Joel, Warren, David, Gonsalves, Brian, Federmeier, Kara, Tranel, Daniel, and Cohen, Neal. 2011. Spontaneous Revisitation During Visual Exploration as a Link Among Strategic Behavior, Learning, and the Hippocampus. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 108:E402–9.Google Scholar
Weber, Till. 2007. Campaign Effects and Second-Order Cycles: A Top-Down Approach to European Parliament Elections. European Union Politics 8 (4):509–536.Google Scholar
Weber, Till. 2009. When the Cat is Away the Mice Will Play: Why Elections to the European Parliament are About Europe After All. Politique Européenne 28:53–71.Google Scholar
Zaller, John. 1992. The Nature and Origins of Mass Opinion. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Supplementary material: Link

Vössing and Weber Dataset

Dataset

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

Vössing and Weber supplementary material

Appendix

Download Vössing and Weber supplementary material(PDF)
PDF 194.4 KB