Construing voting as a duty to others predicts political interest and engagement

Hannah Waldfogel, Princeton University

Many people feel a duty to vote, but is that duty seen as interdependent (i.e., a duty to others) or independent (i.e., a duty to self)? And do these different construals of voting influence political interest and engagement? In research with my colleagues Drs. Andrea Dittmann and Hannah Birnbaum, we examine whether how people construe – or make sense of – the duty to vote influences political engagement.

Voting is key to democracy, yet many eligible United States’ voters do not vote. Turnout differs as a function of people’s social categories; for example, individuals from working-class contexts (i.e., those without a four-year college degree) are less likely to vote compared to their middle-class counterparts (i.e., those with at least a four-year college degree). Whether people (fail to) turnout depends, in part, on structural (e.g., difficulty of voting) and individual (e.g., political efficacy, civic duty) factors. Our work examines an additional potential contributor: people’s construals of voting.

For many U.S. institutions (e.g., universities, workplaces), independent construals reign supreme; behavior is understood in self-focused terms reflecting individual interests and goals. Political behavior might likewise tend to be construed in independent terms. However, voting may also be understood in terms of interdependence (i.e., perceiving voting as a duty to others where people have an obligation to support others, respond to those around them, and contribute to collective change). Across three studies, we test whether (and for whom) construing voting as interdependent (vs. independent) predicts increased perceived duty and political interest.

In Study 1, we use nationally-representative survey data to demonstrate that differences in perceived duty to vote help explain class-based gaps in actual turnout. In Study 2, participants wrote about their personal duty to vote. We coded their responses for independent (e.g., words associated with individual interest) and interdependent (e.g., words pertaining to social relationships) language, finding that more interdependent (vs. independent) language significantly predicts perceived duty to vote and heightened political engagement intentions. In Study 3, participants were randomly assigned to reflect on either interdependence or independence. In both conditions, participants selected from a list of values and wrote about why those values were important to them (e.g., Interdependent: Working Together; Independent: Being Unique). We find that reflecting on interdependence (vs. independence) boosts perceived voting duty, and in turn, predicts heightened political engagement intentions. While Studies 2 and 3 suggest benefits of interdependence regardless of people’s social-class context, we do find slightly larger effects of interdependence for those from working- (vs. middle-) class contexts.

In sum, this work points to construal-based strategies as an easily scalable (and essentially costless) complement to existing turnout interventions. Voter turnout efforts can adopt this approach simply by changing the language around why people should vote. Rather than emphasizing voting as a way to make one’s voice heard or express one’s opinions, we might boost political engagement by instead framing voting as a duty to others.