Skip Navigation



Public Opinion Quarterly Advance Access published online on April 2, 2009

Public Opinion Quarterly, doi:10.1093/poq/nfp017
This Article
Right arrow Summary
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Supplementary Data
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
73/1/98    most recent
nfp017v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Donovan, T.
Right arrow Articles by Smith, D. A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author 2009. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the American Association for Public Opinion Research. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org

Political Engagement, Mobilization, and Direct Democracy

Todd Donovan, Caroline J. Tolbert and Daniel A. Smith

Address correspondence to Caroline J. Tolbert; e-mail: caroline-tolbert{at}uiowa.edu.

Research has found that states using initiatives and referendums have higher turnout, particularly in midterm elections. Existing research has not examined who is mobilized to vote when issues appear on statewide ballots. Building on work by Campbell (1966. "Surge and Decline: A Study of Electoral Change." In Elections and the Political Order, eds. A. Campbell, P. E. Converse, W. E. Miller, and D. E. Stokes. New York: Wiley), we test whether ballot measures engage and mobilize people who do not fit the profile of regular voters. Using national opinion data from the 2004 and 2006 elections, we find that independents (relative to partisans) exhibited greater awareness of and interest in ballot measures in the midterm election. This pattern is not found in the presidential election, where peripheral voters are likely to be mobilized by the stimulus of the presidential race rather than by ballot measures. Absent salient ballot measures, some episodic independent voters may not be engaged by midterm elections. This suggests that some variation in midterm turnout maybe a function of peripheral voters becoming engaged by ballot measures.


TODD DONOVAN is with the Department of Political Science, MS 9082, Western Washington University, Bellingham, WA 98225, USA. CAROLINE J. TOLBERT is with the Department of Political Science, 341 Schaeffer Hall, University of Iowa, IA 52242, USA. DANIEL A. SMITH is with the Department of Political Science, PO Box 117325, Anderson Hall, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32611, USA. We wish to thank Scott Keeter (Pew Research Center for the People and the Press) for placing our questions on 2004 and 2006 Pew surveys.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.