IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ecl/harjfk/rwp04-018.html

Mobilizing the Party Faithful: Results from a Statewide Turnout Experiment in Michigan

Author

Listed:
  • Nickerson, David W.

    (Harvard U)

  • Friedrichs, Ryan D.

    (Harvard U)

  • King, David

    (Harvard U)

Abstract

Recent large-scale field experiments of get out the vote (GOTV) drives have been non-partisan and may not accurately capture the effectiveness of partisan campaign outreach. In the 2002 Michigan gubernatorial election, a large field experiment across 14 state house districts evaluated the cost effectiveness of three mobilization technologies utilized by the Michigan Democratic Party's Youth Coordinated Campaign: door hangers, volunteer phone calls, and face-to-face visits. The results indicate that all three GOTV strategies possess similar cost-effectiveness.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
    • Handle: RePEc:ecl:harjfk:rwp04-018
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://research.hks.harvard.edu/publications/getFile.aspx?Id=120
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Alan Gerber & Donald Green, 2000. "The effect of a nonpartisan get-out-the-vote drive: An experimental study of leafleting," Natural Field Experiments 00247, The Field Experiments Website.
    2. Gerber, Alan S. & Green, Donald P. & Nickerson, David, 2001. "Testing for Publication Bias in Political Science," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 9(4), pages 385-392, January.
    3. 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.
    4. Alan Gerber & Donald Green, 2001. "Getting out the youth vote: Results from randomized field experiments," Natural Field Experiments 00260, The Field Experiments Website.
    5. repec:cup:apsrev:v:50:y:1956:i:01:p:154-165_06 is not listed on IDEAS
    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. 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.
    2. 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.
    3. 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.
    4. John E. Mcnulty, 2005. "Phone-Based GOTV—What’s on the Line? Field Experiments with Varied Partisan Components, 2002-2003," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 601(1), pages 41-65, September.
    5. Per Strömblad & Gunnar Myrberg, 2013. "Urban Inequality and Political Recruitment," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 50(5), pages 1049-1065, April.
    6. 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.
    7. 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.
    8. J. Andrew Harris & Catherine Kamindo & Peter van der Windt, 2020. "Electoral Administration in Fledgling Democracies:Experimental Evidence from Kenya," Working Papers 20200036, New York University Abu Dhabi, Department of Social Science, revised Jan 2020.
    9. Anna L. Harvey, 2001. "Partisanship As A Social Convention," Rationality and Society, , vol. 13(4), pages 462-504, November.
    10. 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.
    11. Oberholzer-Gee, Felix & Waldfogel, Joel, 2005. "Strength in Numbers: Group Size and Political Mobilization," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 48(1), pages 73-91, April.
    12. 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.
    13. 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.
    14. Xavier Giné & Ghazala Mansuri, 2018. "Together We Will: Experimental Evidence on Female Voting Behavior in Pakistan," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 10(1), pages 207-235, January.
    15. 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.
    16. Alan Gerber & Donald Green, 2001. "Getting out the youth vote: Results from randomized field experiments," Natural Field Experiments 00260, The Field Experiments Website.
    17. 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.
    18. Jordan, Diana & Trexler, Andrew & Ollerenshaw, Trent, 2025. "New Evidence and Design Considerations for Repeated Measure Experiments in Survey Research," OSF Preprints q6czp_v1, Center for Open Science.
    19. Stanley, T. D. & Doucouliagos, Hristos, 2013. "Better than random: weighted least squares meta-regression analysis," Working Papers eco_2013_2, Deakin University, Department of Economics.
    20. 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.

    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:ecl:harjfk:rwp04-018. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ksharus.html .

    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.