Who is early voting? An individual level examination

Grant W. Neeley, Lilliard Richardson

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

40 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objective. Early voting has been suggested as one method of increasing voter turnout. Allowing voters to cast their ballots during a longer time period may ameliorate some barriers to participation that exist. However, the question of whether early voting mobilizes previous nonvoting registrants or simply makes voting easier for those who would have participated anyway remains largely unanswered. Methods. We test these questions through the use of an individual level survey of voters in one Tennessee county. Using logistic regression, we consider the impact of demographic and attitudinal factors on the propensity to vote on election day or to use early voting. Results. We find marked differences between nonvoters and voters of either type, but we find few significant differences between early voters and traditional voters. We find little support for a mobilization effect and some evidence suggests that early voting merely conveniences those who would have voted anyway.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)381-392
Number of pages12
JournalSocial Science Journal
Volume38
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - Sep 1 2001

Fingerprint

Politics
voting
examination
voter turnout
mobilization
voter
Logistic Models
election
logistics
Demography
regression
participation
evidence

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Social Psychology
  • Sociology and Political Science

Cite this

@article{557ebe217721487995f8497ae97299a1,
title = "Who is early voting? An individual level examination",
abstract = "Objective. Early voting has been suggested as one method of increasing voter turnout. Allowing voters to cast their ballots during a longer time period may ameliorate some barriers to participation that exist. However, the question of whether early voting mobilizes previous nonvoting registrants or simply makes voting easier for those who would have participated anyway remains largely unanswered. Methods. We test these questions through the use of an individual level survey of voters in one Tennessee county. Using logistic regression, we consider the impact of demographic and attitudinal factors on the propensity to vote on election day or to use early voting. Results. We find marked differences between nonvoters and voters of either type, but we find few significant differences between early voters and traditional voters. We find little support for a mobilization effect and some evidence suggests that early voting merely conveniences those who would have voted anyway.",
author = "Neeley, {Grant W.} and Lilliard Richardson",
year = "2001",
month = "9",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/S0362-3319(01)00135-5",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "38",
pages = "381--392",
journal = "Social Science Journal",
issn = "0362-3319",
publisher = "Elsevier Inc.",
number = "3",

}

Who is early voting? An individual level examination. / Neeley, Grant W.; Richardson, Lilliard.

In: Social Science Journal, Vol. 38, No. 3, 01.09.2001, p. 381-392.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Who is early voting? An individual level examination

AU - Neeley, Grant W.

AU - Richardson, Lilliard

PY - 2001/9/1

Y1 - 2001/9/1

N2 - Objective. Early voting has been suggested as one method of increasing voter turnout. Allowing voters to cast their ballots during a longer time period may ameliorate some barriers to participation that exist. However, the question of whether early voting mobilizes previous nonvoting registrants or simply makes voting easier for those who would have participated anyway remains largely unanswered. Methods. We test these questions through the use of an individual level survey of voters in one Tennessee county. Using logistic regression, we consider the impact of demographic and attitudinal factors on the propensity to vote on election day or to use early voting. Results. We find marked differences between nonvoters and voters of either type, but we find few significant differences between early voters and traditional voters. We find little support for a mobilization effect and some evidence suggests that early voting merely conveniences those who would have voted anyway.

AB - Objective. Early voting has been suggested as one method of increasing voter turnout. Allowing voters to cast their ballots during a longer time period may ameliorate some barriers to participation that exist. However, the question of whether early voting mobilizes previous nonvoting registrants or simply makes voting easier for those who would have participated anyway remains largely unanswered. Methods. We test these questions through the use of an individual level survey of voters in one Tennessee county. Using logistic regression, we consider the impact of demographic and attitudinal factors on the propensity to vote on election day or to use early voting. Results. We find marked differences between nonvoters and voters of either type, but we find few significant differences between early voters and traditional voters. We find little support for a mobilization effect and some evidence suggests that early voting merely conveniences those who would have voted anyway.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0042321079&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0042321079&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/S0362-3319(01)00135-5

DO - 10.1016/S0362-3319(01)00135-5

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:0042321079

VL - 38

SP - 381

EP - 392

JO - Social Science Journal

JF - Social Science Journal

SN - 0362-3319

IS - 3

ER -