{"title":"Voting behavior as social action: Habits, norms, values, and rationality in electoral participation","authors":"R. Becker","doi":"10.1177/10434631221142733","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The aim of the study is to contribute, theoretically and empirically, to an improved understanding of the social processes and mechanisms generating a citizen’s decisions regarding electoral participation. It seeks to contribute to a solution for the legendary paradox of electoral participation based on formalized social-psychological dual process theories by integrating the Weberian typology of rationalities and related social action into a comprehensive explanation of voter turnout. The empirical analysis, based on two German surveys carried out in 1998 and 2017, reveals that the instrumentally rational voting (purposively rational action) emphasized in the classic rational choice theories used in economic electoral research is rather a special case among modal types of action such as habitual voting (traditional action), norm-related voting (norm-guided action), and voting due to value rationality (value-rational action). Most voters vote out of habit and based on norms and values, while purely purposive-rational voting is more of a special case.","PeriodicalId":47079,"journal":{"name":"Rationality and Society","volume":"35 1","pages":"81 - 109"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Rationality and Society","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10434631221142733","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SOCIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2
Abstract
The aim of the study is to contribute, theoretically and empirically, to an improved understanding of the social processes and mechanisms generating a citizen’s decisions regarding electoral participation. It seeks to contribute to a solution for the legendary paradox of electoral participation based on formalized social-psychological dual process theories by integrating the Weberian typology of rationalities and related social action into a comprehensive explanation of voter turnout. The empirical analysis, based on two German surveys carried out in 1998 and 2017, reveals that the instrumentally rational voting (purposively rational action) emphasized in the classic rational choice theories used in economic electoral research is rather a special case among modal types of action such as habitual voting (traditional action), norm-related voting (norm-guided action), and voting due to value rationality (value-rational action). Most voters vote out of habit and based on norms and values, while purely purposive-rational voting is more of a special case.
期刊介绍:
Rationality & Society focuses on the growing contributions of rational-action based theory, and the questions and controversies surrounding this growth. Why Choose Rationality and Society? The trend toward ever-greater specialization in many areas of intellectual life has lead to fragmentation that deprives scholars of the ability to communicate even in closely adjoining fields. The emergence of the rational action paradigm as the inter-lingua of the social sciences is a remarkable exception to this trend. It is the one paradigm that offers the promise of bringing greater theoretical unity across disciplines such as economics, sociology, political science, cognitive psychology, moral philosophy and law.