Jenke Libby, Huettel Scott A
Department of Political Science, University of Houston, Houston, TX, United States.
Department of Psychology & Neuroscience, Duke University, Durham, NC, United States.
Front Psychol. 2020 Oct 15;11:566020. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.566020. eCollection 2020.
Canonical rational choice models of voter preferences assume that voters select candidates whose policy positions most closely match their own. Yet, much of the electorate often appears to prioritize identity variables (e.g., social categories, group membership) over policy considerations. Here, we report an empirical test of policy-identity interactions using surveys of likely voters conducted in the 24 hours before the 2016 United States presidential election and the 2018 United States senatorial elections. Each respondent indicated not only their policy preferences but also key social group identities and how those identities would be reinforced by voting. We observed striking evidence for a competition between policy and social group identification: For voters who exhibited the maximal effects of identity, policy positions were essentially irrelevant to their candidate preferences. These results account for dissociations between voters' stated policy preferences and their voting behavior, while linking empirical observations of political behavior to new models derived from psychology and neuroscience.
选民偏好的经典理性选择模型假定,选民会选择政策立场与自身最为匹配的候选人。然而,大部分选民似乎常常将身份变量(如社会类别、群体成员身份)置于政策考量之上。在此,我们报告一项关于政策与身份交互作用的实证检验,该检验采用了在2016年美国总统大选和2018年美国参议院选举前24小时对可能投票者进行的调查。每位受访者不仅表明了他们的政策偏好,还指出了关键的社会群体身份以及这些身份将如何通过投票得到强化。我们观察到了政策与社会群体认同之间存在竞争的显著证据:对于那些身份效应最大的选民而言,政策立场与他们的候选人偏好基本无关。这些结果解释了选民宣称的政策偏好与其投票行为之间的脱节,同时将政治行为的实证观察与源自心理学和神经科学的新模型联系起来。