IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/pscirm/v10y2022i2p445-451_15.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Are voters' views about proportional outcomes shaped by partisan preferences? A survey experiment in the context of a real election

Author

Listed:
  • Blais, André
  • Sevi, Semra
  • Plescia, Carolina

Abstract

We examine citizens' evaluations of majoritarian and proportional electoral outcomes through an innovative experimental design. We ask respondents to react to six possible electoral outcomes during the 2019 Canadian federal election campaign. There are two treatments: the performance of the party and the proportionality of electoral outcomes. There are three performance conditions: the preferred party's vote share corresponds to vote intentions as reported in the polls at the time of the survey (the reference), or it gets 6 percentage points more (fewer) votes. There are two electoral outcome conditions: disproportional and proportional. We find that proportional outcomes are slightly preferred and that these preferences are partly conditional on partisan considerations. In the end, however, people focus on the ultimate outcome, that is, who is likely to form the government. People are happy when their party has a plurality of seats and is therefore likely to form the government, and relatively unhappy otherwise. We end with a discussion of the merits and limits of our research design.

Suggested Citation

  • Blais, André & Sevi, Semra & Plescia, Carolina, 2022. "Are voters' views about proportional outcomes shaped by partisan preferences? A survey experiment in the context of a real election," Political Science Research and Methods, Cambridge University Press, vol. 10(2), pages 445-451, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:pscirm:v:10:y:2022:i:2:p:445-451_15
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S2049847021000248/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    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:cup:pscirm:v:10:y:2022:i:2:p:445-451_15. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/ram .

    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.