Advertisement

Direct Democracy, Educative Effects, and the (Mis)Measurement of Ballot Measure Awareness

  • Jay Barth
  • Craig M. Burnett
  • Janine ParryEmail author
Original Paper

Abstract

A century ago, Progressive reformers in the U.S. introduced the institutional innovations of direct democracy, claiming these reforms would cultivate better citizens. Two decades of high-profile research have supported and challenged the relationship between direct democracy, increased attention to politics, and a higher turnout rate. We propose, however, that a necessary condition of the “educative effects” model is voter familiarity with initiatives and referendums. While some research has examined ballot measure awareness, we suspect that that the standard measurements—e.g., “Have you heard of Proposition X?”—overestimate actual knowledge. Specifically, we measure ballot measure knowledge in a manner requiring voters to demonstrate familiarity with specific measures rather than merely asserting broad familiarity. Our approach reveals that the public’s awareness of statewide ballot measures, both in the abstract and with respect to particular measures, is far lower than past research suggests. Importantly, it also reveals that people with high levels of education, political interest, and knowledge of national politics are the most likely to misrepresent their ballot measure awareness.

Keywords

Direct democracy Ballot measures Educative effects Voter knowledge Political behavior 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors wish to thank the ever-helpful participants of the annual State Politics and Policy Conference for their suggestions, most especially Michael Binder and Daniel Biggers, as well as the manuscript’s anonymous reviewers. Any errors that remain are of course our own.

References

  1. Benz, M., & Stutzer, A. (2004). Are voters better informed when they have a larger say in politics? Public Choice, 119, 31–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Berelson, B. R., Lazarsfeld, P. F., & McPhee, W. N. (1954). Voting: a study of opinion formulation in a presidential campaign. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  3. Biggers, D. R. (2011). When ballot issues matter: social issue ballot measures and their impact on turnout. Political Behavior, 33, 3–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Biggers, D. R. (2012). Can a social issue proposition increase political knowledge? Campaign learning and the educative effects of direct democracy. American Politics Research, 40(6), 998–1025.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Biggers, D. R. (2014). Morality at the ballot: Direct democracy and political engagement in the United States. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Boehmke, F. J., & Michael Alvarez, R. (2014). The influence of initiative signature-gathering campaigns on political participation. Social Science Quarterly, 95, 165–183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Boudreau, C., & MacKenzie, S. A. (2014). Informing the electorate? How party cues and policy information affect public opinion about initiatives. American Journal of Political Science, 58, 48–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bowler, S., & Donovan, T. (1994). Information and opinion change on ballot propositions. Political Behavior, 16(4), 411–435.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bowler, S., & Donovan, T. (1998). Demanding choices: Opinion, voting, and direct democracy. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bowler, S., & Donovan, T. (2002). Democracy, institutions, and attitudes about citizen influence on government. British Journal of Political Science, 32, 371–390.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Burnett, C. M., & Kogan, V. (2012). Familiar choices: Reconsidering institutional effects of the direct initiative. State Politics and Policy Quarterly, 12, 204–224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Burnett, C. M., & Kogan, V. (2015). When does ballot language influence voter choices? Evidence from a survey experiment. Political Communication, 31, 109–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Burnett, C. M., & Parry, J. A. (2014). Gubernatorial endorsements and ballot measure approval. State Politics and Policy Quarterly, 14, 178–195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Childers, M., & Binder, M. (2012). Engaged by the initiative? How the use of citizen initiatives increases voter turnout. Political Research Quarterly, 65, 93–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. DeBell, M. (2013). Harder than it looks: Coding political knowledge on the ANES”. Political Analysis, 21, 393–406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Donovan, T., Tolbert, C. J., & Smith, D. A. (2009). Political engagement, mobilization and direct democracy. Public Opinion Quarterly, 73, 98–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Delli Carpini, M. X., & Keeter, S. (1993). Measuring political knowledge: Putting first things first. American Journal of Political Science, 37, 1179–1206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Delli Carpini, M. X., & Keeter, S. (1996). What Americans know about politics and why it matters. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  19. Dyck, J., & Lascher, E. (2009). Direct democracy and political efficacy reconsidered. Political Behavior, 31, 401–427.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Dyck, J. J., & Seabrook, N. R. (2010). Mobilized by direct democracy: short-term versus long-term effects and the geography of turnout in ballot measure elections. Social Science Quarterly, 91, 188–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Everson, D. (1981). The effects of initiatives on voter turnout: A comparative state analysis. Western Political Quarterly, 34, 415–425.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Feig, D. G. (2007). Race, roll-off, and the straight-ticket option. Politics & Policy, 35, 548–568.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Geer, J. G. (1988). What do open-ended questions measure? Public Opinion Quarterly, 52, 565–571.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Goebel, T. (2002). A government by the people: Direct democracy in America, 1890–1940. Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Press.Google Scholar
  25. Kousser, T., & McCubbins, M. (2005). Social choice, crypto-initiatives, and policymaking by direct democracy. Southern California Law Review, 78, 949–984.Google Scholar
  26. Lewis-Beck, M. S., Jacoby, W. G., Norpoth, H., & Weisberg, H. F. (2008). The American voter revisited. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Lodge, M., & Taber, C. S. (2013). The rationalizing voter. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Lupia, A. (2006). How elitism undermines the study of voter competence. Critical Review, 18, 217–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Lupia, A., & Matsusaka, J. (2004). Direct democracy: New approaches to old questions. Annual Review of Political Science, 7, 463–482.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Lyons, J., Jaeger, W. P., & Wolak, J. (2012). The roots of citizens’ knowledge of state politics. State Politics & Policy Quarterly, 13, 183–202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Magleby, D. (1984). Direct legislation: Voting on ballot propositions in the United States. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  32. Mendelsohn, M., & Cutler, F. (2000). The effect of referendums on democratic citizens: Information, politicization, efficacy and tolerance. British Journal of Political Science, 30, 685–698.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Mondak, J. J. (2001). Developing valid knowledge scales. American Journal of Political Science, 45, 224–238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Mondak, J. J., & Davis, B. C. (2001). Asked and answered: Knowledge levels when we will not take “don’t know” for an answer. Political Behavior, 23, 199–224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Nicholson, S. (2003). The political environment and ballot proposition awareness. American Journal of Political Science, 47, 403–410.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Nicholson, S. (2005). Voting the agenda: Candidates elections and ballot propositions. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  37. Oppenheimer, D., & Edwards, M. (2012). Democracy despite itself: Why a system that shouldn’t work at all works so well. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Parry, J. A., Smith, D. A., & Henry, S. (2012). The impact of petition signing on voter turnout. Political Behavior, 34, 117–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Reilly, S., & Richey, S. (2011). Ballot question readability and roll-off: The impact of language complexity. Political Research Quarterly, 64, 59–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Robison, J. (2015). Who knows? Question format and political knowledge. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 27, 1–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Schlozman, D., & Yohai, I. (2008). How initiatives don’t always make citizens: Ballot initiatives in the American States, 1978–2004. Political Behavior, 30, 469–489.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Seabrook, N. R., Dyck, J. J., & Lascher, E. L. (2015). Do ballot initiatives increase general political knowledge? Political Behavior, 37, 279–307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Selb, P. (2008). Supersized votes: Ballot length, uncertainty, and choice in direct legislation elections. Public Choice, 135, 319–336.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Smith, M. A. (2001). The contingent effects of ballot initiatives and candidate races on turnout. American Journal of Political Science, 45, 700–706.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Smith, M. A. (2002). Ballot initiatives and the democratic citizen. The Journal of Politics, 64, 892–903.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Smith, D. A., & Tolbert, C. (2004). Educated by initiative: The effects of direct democracy on citizens and political organizations. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Smith, D. A., & Tolbert, C. (2007). The instrumental and educative effects of ballot measures: Research on direct democracy in the American States. State Politics and Policy Quarterly, 7, 416–445.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Smith, D. A., & Tolbert, C. (2010). Direct democracy, public opinion, and candidate choice. Public Opinion Quarterly, 74, 85–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Tolbert, C. J., Grummel, J., & Smith, D. A. (2001). The effect of ballot initiatives on voter turnout in the American States. American Politics Research, 29, 625–648.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Tolbert, C., McNeal, R. S., & Smith, D. A. (2003). Enhancing civic engagement: The effect of direct democracy on political participation and knowledge. State Politics and Policy Quarterly, 3, 23–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Tolbert, C. J., & Smith, D. A. (2005). The educative effects of ballot initiatives on voter turnout. American Politics Research, 33, 283–309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Hendrix CollegeConwayUSA
  2. 2.Hofstra UniversityHempsteadUSA
  3. 3.Department of Political ScienceUniversity of ArkansasFayettevilleUSA

Personalised recommendations