YALE DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMICS
STICKING WITH YOUR VOTE: Sendhil Mullainathan and Ebonya Washington May 2006 Abstract In traditional models, votes are an expression of preferences
and beliefs. Psychological theories of cognitive dissonance suggest, however, that
behavior may shape preferences. In this view, the very act of voting may influence
political attitudes. A vote for a candidate may lead to more favorable interpretations of
his actions in the future. We test the empirical relevance of cognitive dissonance in US
Presidential elections. The key problem in such a test is the endogeneity of voter choice
which leads to a mechanical relationship between voting and preferences. We use the voting
age restrictions to help surmount this difficulty. We examine the Presidential opinion
ratings of nineteen and twenty year olds two years after the President's election.
Consistent with cognitive dissonance, we find that twenty year olds (who were eligible to
vote in the election) show greater polarization of opinions than comparable nineteen year
olds (who were ineligible to vote). We rule out that aging drives these results in two
ways. First, we find no polarization differences in years in which twenty and nineteen
year olds would not have differed in their eligibility to vote in the prior Presidential
election. Second, we show a similar effect when we compare polarization (for all age
groups) in opinions of Senators elected during high turnout Presidential campaign years
with Senators elected during low turnout non-Presidential campaign years. Thus we find
empirical support for the relevance of cognitive dissonance to voting behavior. This
finding has at least three implications for the dynamics of voting behavior. First, it
offers a new rationale for the incumbency advantage. Second, it suggests that there is an
efficiency argument for term limits. And finally, our results demonstrate that efficiency
may not be increasing in turnout level. |