IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/anname/v601y2005i1p66-84.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Giving Voice to Latino Voters: A Field Experiment on the Effectiveness of a National Nonpartisan Mobilization Effort

Author

Listed:
  • Ricardo Ramírez

    (Department of Political Science, University of Southern California)

Abstract

In this article, I present a summary of the findings of a randomized field experiment of 465,134 registered Latino voters, the largest such experiment on Latinos to date. The National Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials’s (NALEO’s) Voces del Pueblo voter mobilization effort in 2002 explored three alternative modes of communicating with voters: direct mail, robotic phone calls, and live phone calls from volunteers. Of the three, only live phone calls produced a statistically significant increase in voter turnout. The ineffectiveness of direct mail and robotic calls is consistent with results from other experimental campaigns. What remains unclear is the extent to which direct mail and robotic calls targeting low-propensity Latino voters would be more effective in presidential elections. For the present, it appears that the most effective way to mobilize low-propensity Latino voters is through phone banks staffed by volunteers.

Suggested Citation

  • Ricardo Ramírez, 2005. "Giving Voice to Latino Voters: A Field Experiment on the Effectiveness of a National Nonpartisan Mobilization Effort," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 601(1), pages 66-84, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:anname:v:601:y:2005:i:1:p:66-84
    DOI: 10.1177/0002716205278422
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0002716205278422
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0002716205278422?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Huckfeldt, Robert & Sprague, John, 1992. "Political Parties and Electoral Mobilization: Political Structure, Social Structure, and the Party Canvass," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 86(1), pages 70-86, March.
    2. Alan Gerber & Donald Green, 2001. "Getting out the youth vote: Results from randomized field experiments," Natural Field Experiments 00260, The Field Experiments Website.
    3. Donald Green, 2004. "Mobilizing african-american voters using direct mail and commercial phone banks: A field experiment," Natural Field Experiments 00262, The Field Experiments Website.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Nickerson, David W. & Friedrichs, Ryan D. & King, David, 2004. "Mobilizing the Party Faithful: Results from a Statewide Turnout Experiment in Michigan," Working Paper Series rwp04-018, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.
    2. Ryan Friedrichs & David King & David Nickerson, 2004. "Mobilizing the party faithful: Results from a statewide turnout experiment in michigan," Natural Field Experiments 00315, The Field Experiments Website.
    3. Per Strömblad & Gunnar Myrberg, 2013. "Urban Inequality and Political Recruitment," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 50(5), pages 1049-1065, April.
    4. Sidney Verba & Kay L. Schlozman & Henry E. Brady, 2000. "Rational Action and Political Activity," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 12(3), pages 243-268, July.
    5. Anna L. Harvey, 2001. "Partisanship As A Social Convention," Rationality and Society, , vol. 13(4), pages 462-504, November.
    6. Courtney L. Juelich & Joseph A. Coll, 2021. "Ranked Choice Voting and Youth Voter Turnout: The Roles of Campaign Civility and Candidate Contact," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 9(2), pages 319-331.
    7. Traci R. Burch, 2014. "Effects of Imprisonment and Community Supervision on Neighborhood Political Participation in North Carolina," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 651(1), pages 184-201, January.
    8. Kevin Denny & Orla Doyle, 2009. "Does Voting History Matter? Analysing Persistence in Turnout," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 53(1), pages 17-35, January.
    9. Peter W. Wielhouwer, 2020. "Resistance and Response: Latinos and Conservative Radio Advertisements," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 101(4), pages 1513-1533, July.
    10. Kosuke Imai, 2005. "Do get-out-the-vote calls reduce turnout? The importance of statistical methods for field experiments," Natural Field Experiments 00272, The Field Experiments Website.
    11. 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.
    12. Gäbler, Stefanie & Potrafke, Niklas & Rösel, Felix, 2017. "Compulsory Voting, Voter Turnout and Asymmetrical Habit-formation," VfS Annual Conference 2017 (Vienna): Alternative Structures for Money and Banking 168074, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    13. Felix Oberholzer-Gee & Joel Waldfogel, 2001. "Electoral Acceleration: The Effect of Minority Population on Minority Voter Turnout," NBER Working Papers 8252, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    14. Andersen, Jørgen Juel & Fiva, Jon H. & Natvik, Gisle James, 2014. "Voting when the stakes are high," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 157-166.
    15. Jared Barton & Marco Castillo & Ragan Petrie, 2014. "What Persuades Voters? A Field Experiment on Political Campaigning," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 124(574), pages 293-326, February.
    16. Michael Ensley, 2012. "Incumbent positioning, ideological heterogeneity and mobilization in U.S. House elections," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 151(1), pages 43-61, April.
    17. Stefano DellaVigna & Ethan Kaplan, 2007. "The Fox News Effect: Media Bias and Voting," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 122(3), pages 1187-1234.
    18. Cheonsoo Kim & Soobum Lee, 2021. "Does social media type matter to politics? Investigating the difference in political participation depending on preferred social media sites," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 102(6), pages 2942-2954, November.
    19. 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.
    20. Nunnari, Salvatore & Nichter, Simeon, 2019. "Declared Support and Clientelism," CEPR Discussion Papers 13460, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.

    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:66-84. 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: 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.