Social pressure, network topology, and the persistence of the voting norm

Mateusz Wajzer

doi:10.34135/sjps.250205

Authors

Mateusz Wajzer University of Silesia in Katowice, Institute of Political Science

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.34135/sjps.250205

Keywords:

voting norm, social networks, Watts-Strogatz algorithm, agent-based model, intended turnout

Abstract

This study presents the results of an agent-based simulation of the effects of social pressure and network topology on the persistence of the voting norm. It aims to examine how variations in network topology and the degree of reduction of social influence shape the persistence of intended turnout. The decision rule for an agent/voter is an extended calculus of voting by Riker and Ordeshook, considering social pressure and the mechanism of internalisation of the sense of civic duty. The model includes networks generated using the Watts-Strogatz algorithm, which differ in rewiring probability. The model assumes two phases of voting norm spreading: a mobilisation phase (full social pressure), in which intended turnout increases, and a reduction phase (pressure fully or partially suppressed), in which turnout decreases and then stabilises at a level appropriate to the network. In the mobilisation phase, differences in intended turnout between the studied networks mainly depend on the structure of connections between individuals, and in the reduction phase, on the degree of suppression of social pressure. Even a small social influence can lead to a dynamic increase in intended turnout and maintain it at a relatively high level if the network is highly clustered and contains few random edges.

References

Abrams, S., Iversen, T., & Soskice, D. (2011). Informal social networks and rational voting. British Journal of Political Science, 41(2), 229–257. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0007123410000499

Aldrich, J. H. (1993). Rational choice and turnout. American Journal of Political Science, 37(1), 246–278. https://doi.org/10.2307/2111531

Amaro de Matos, J., & Barros, P. P. (2004). Social norms and the paradox of elections’ turnout. Public Choice, 121(1), 239–255. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11127-004-2251-4

Blais, A., Galais, C., & Coulombe, M. (2019). The effect of social pressure from family and friends on turnout. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 36(9), 2824–2841. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407518802463

Bond, R. M., Fariss, C. J., Jones, J. J., Kramer, A. D. I., Marlow, C., Settle, J. E., & Fowler, J. H. (2012). A 61-million-person experiment in social influence and political mobilization. Nature, 489(7415), 295–298. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature11421

Centola, D., & Macy, M. (2007). Complex contagions and the weakness of long ties. American Journal of Sociology, 113(3), 702–734. https://doi.org/10.1086/521848

Coppock, A., & Green, D. P. (2016). Is voting habit forming? New evidence from experiments and regression discontinuities. American Journal of Political Science, 60(4), 1044–1062. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajps.12210

Csárdi, G., & Nepusz, T. (2006). The igraph software package for complex network research. InterJournal, Complex Systems, 1695, 1–9.

Dowding, K. (2005). Is it rational to vote? Five types of answer and a suggestion. The British Journal of Politics and International Relations, 7(3), 442–459. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-856X.2005.00188.x

Downs, A. (1957). An Economic Theory of Democracy. Harper & Row.

Eckles, D., Mossel, E., Rahimian, M. A., & Sen, S. (2023). Long ties accelerate noisy threshold-based contagions (No. arXiv:1810.03579). arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1810.03579

Fieldhouse, E., & Cutts, D. (2012). The companion effect: Household and local context and the turnout of young people. The Journal of Politics, 74(3), 856–869. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022381612000345

Fowler, J. H. (2005). Turnout in a small world. In A. Zuckerman (Ed.), Social Logic of Politics (pp. 269–287). Temple University Press.

Fowler, J. H., & Smirnov, O. (2005). Dynamic parties and social turnout: An agent‐based model. American Journal of Sociology, 110(4), 1070–1094. https://doi.org/10.1086/426554

Gerber, A. S., Green, D. P., & Larimer, C. W. (2008). Social pressure and voter turnout: Evidence from a large-scale field experiment. American Political Science Review, 102(1), 33–48. https://doi.org/10.1017/S000305540808009X

Gerber, A. S., Green, D. P., & Larimer, C. W. (2010). An experiment testing the relative effectiveness of encouraging voter participation by inducing feelings of pride or shame. Political Behavior, 32(3), 409–422.

Gerber, A. S., Green, D. P., & Shachar, R. (2003). Voting may be habit-forming: Evidence from a randomized field experiment. American Journal of Political Science, 47(3), 540–550. https://doi.org/10.2307/3186114

Geys, B. (2006). ‘Rational’ theories of voter turnout: A review. Political Studies Review, 4(1), 16–35. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1478-9299.2006.00034.x

Goldfarb, R. S., & Sigelman, L. (2010). Does ‘civic duty’ ‘solve’ the rational choice voter turnout puzzle? Journal of Theoretical Politics, 22(3), 275–300. https://doi.org/10.1177/0951629810365798

Granovetter, M. S. (1978). Threshold models of collective behavior. American Journal of Sociology, 83(6), 1420–1443. https://doi.org/10.1086/226707

Green, D. P., & Shachar, R. (2000). Habit formation and political behaviour: Evidence of consuetude in voter turnout. British Journal of Political Science, 30(4), 561–573.

Haenschen, K. (2016). Social pressure on social media: Using Facebook status updates to increase voter turnout. Journal of Communication, 66(4), 542–563. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcom.12236

Kernell, G., & Lamberson, P. J. (2023). Social networks and voter turnout. Royal Society Open Science, 10(10), 230704. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.230704

Latora, V., & Marchiori, M. (2001). Efficient Behavior of Small-World Networks. Physical Review Letters, 87(19), 198701. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.87.198701

Lindgren, K.-O., Nyman, P., & Oskarsson, S. (2025). Examining voting spillover effects of text message reminders. British Journal of Political Science, 55, e21. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0007123424000504

Mann, C. B. (2010). Is there backlash to social pressure? A large-scale field experiment on voter mobilization. Political Behavior, 32(3), 387–407.

Mueller, D. C. (2003). Public Choice III. Cambridge University Press.

Nickerson, D. W. (2008). Is voting contagious? Evidence from two field experiments. American Political Science Review, 102(1), 49–57. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003055408080039

Owen, G., & Grofman, B. (1984). To vote or not to vote: The paradox of nonvoting. Public Choice, 42(3), 311–325. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00124949

Panagopoulos, C. (2010). Affect, social pressure and prosocial motivation: Field experimental evidence of the mobilizing effects of pride, shame and publicizing voting behavior. Political Behavior, 32(3), 369–386. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11109-010-9114-0

R Core Team. (2023). R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing (Version 4.2.3) [Computer software]. Foundation for Statistical Computing. https://www.R-project.org/

Riker, W. H., & Ordeshook, P. C. (1968). A theory of the calculus of voting. American Political Science Review, 62(1), 25–42. https://doi.org/10.2307/1953324

Rogers, T., Green, D. P., Ternovski, J., & Ferrerosa Young, C. (2017). Social pressure and voting: A field experiment conducted in a high-salience election. Electoral Studies, 46, 87–100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.electstud.2017.02.004

Rolfe, M. (2005). Conditional choice: Social networks and decision-making. Annual Midwest Political Science Association Conference.

Siegel, D. A. (2009). Social networks and collective action. American Journal of Political Science, 53(1), 122–138. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5907.2008.00361.x

Ternovski, J. (2024). Making sense of voting “habits”: Applying the process model of behavior change to a series of large-scale get-out-the-vote experiments. Journal of Experimental Political Science, 11(2), 175–190. https://doi.org/10.1017/XPS.2023.25

Watts, D. J., & Strogatz, S. H. (1998). Collective dynamics of ‘small-world’ networks. Nature, 393(6684), 440–442. https://doi.org/10.1038/30918

Wickham, H. (2016). ggplot2: Elegant Graphics for Data Analysis. Springer Verlag.

Wickham, H., François, R., Henry, L., Müller, K., & Vaughan, D. (2023). dplyr: A Grammar of Data Manipulation (Version 1.1.4) [Computer software]. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=dplyr