Show Summary Details

Page of

PRINTED FROM OXFORD HANDBOOKS ONLINE (www.oxfordhandbooks.com). © Oxford University Press, 2018. All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a title in Oxford Handbooks Online for personal use (for details see Privacy Policy and Legal Notice).

date: 13 November 2019

Abstract and Keywords

A long-standing criticism of voters in direct democracy elections is that they lack informed and stable opinions on policy issues and are therefore highly susceptible to campaigns. Voters are therefore not so much persuaded by substantive arguments to vote in a way that is consistent with fixed policy views but instead are pushed and pulled to vote for and against ballot measures since the foundations of their preferences rest on inconsistent and incomplete ideologies. Voters in ballot proposition contests are, in other words, persuaded all too easily to change their views. This chapter reviews that argument and presents evidence for a counter-argument that voters—at least in the US setting—are less open to persuasion than the literature often suggests.

Keywords: heuristics, cues, direct democracy, consistency, campaign effects, voter competence, opinion stability

Access to the complete content on Oxford Handbooks Online requires a subscription or purchase. Public users are able to search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter without a subscription.

Please subscribe or login to access full text content.

If you have purchased a print title that contains an access token, please see the token for information about how to register your code.

For questions on access or troubleshooting, please check our FAQs, and if you can''t find the answer there, please contact us.