Why Youth Vote: Identity, Inspirational Leaders and Independence

165 Pages·2018·1.17 MB·English

by  Bobbi Gentry (auth.)

Bobbi Gentry
Why
Youth Vote
Identity, Inspirational Leaders
and Independence
Why Youth Vote
Bobbi Gentry
Why Youth Vote
Identity, Inspirational Leaders and
Independence
Bobbi Gentry
Bridgewater College
Bridgewater, VA, USA
ISBN 978-3-319-69607-2 ISBN 978-3-319-69608-9 (eBook)
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-69608-9
Library of Congress Control Number: 2017956912
© Springer International Publishing AG 2018
This work is subject to copyright. All rights are reserved by the Publisher, whether the whole or part of
the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation,
broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information
storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology
now known or hereafter developed.
The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication
does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant
protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use.
The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book
are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the
editors give a warranty, express or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors
or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims
in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Printed on acid-free paper
This Springer imprint is published by Springer Nature
The registered company is Springer International Publishing AG
The registered company address is: Gewerbestrasse 11, 6330 Cham, Switzerland
Contents
1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Identity and Voting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
Why Study Young People? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
The Intersections of Contribution and Theory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Traditional Explanations for Youth Non-voting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Civic Engagement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Identity as a Psychological Approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Inspirational Candidates and the Youth Vote . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Political Independence: Developed or Default Identity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
The Argument . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
The Complexities and Contribution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
The Chapters Ahead . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
2 Political Identity: Meaning, Measures, and Evidence . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
Distinguishing Political Identity from Identity Politics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
Political Identity as Individual or Social? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
Political Ego Identity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
Aspects of Psychological Identity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
Linkages of Identity Statuses and Behavior . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
Achievement Status . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
Moratorium Status . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
Foreclosure Status . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
Diffusion Status. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
Identity Processing Styles and Identity Statuses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
Political Identity Particulars . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
Distinguishing Political Ego Identity from Party Identification . . . . . . . . 34
Distinguishing Political Ego Identity from Ethnic Identity . . . . . . . . . . . 36
Scope of This Research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
Civic Engagement and Identity Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
The Intersection of Political Science and Psychology: Promises
and Limitations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
v
vi Contents
Conceptualization of Identity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
Typology of Political Ego Identity Statuses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
Fully Developed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
Somewhat Developed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
Explorers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
Diffusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
Explaining the Process of Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
What Is Different About Youth Participants and Nonparticipants? . . . . . 48
3 Inspirational Leaders, Personal Narrative, and Youth Identity . . . . . 49
Inspirational Leaders and the Youth Vote . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
The Intersection of Identity Development and Leadership . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
Meaning and Interaction of Leadership . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
Targeting by Candidates: How to Convey a Personal Narrative . . . . . . 52
Charismatic Leadership and Opinion Leaders . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
Transformational Leaders and Inspiration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
The Peer Influence and Inspirational Leaders . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
Evidence of Inspirational Leadership Effects on Youth Turnout . . . . . . . 64
Characteristics Study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
Recent Evidence of Hopefulness 2008, 2012, 2016 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
Presidential Speech Study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70
Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75
4 Political Independence of Youth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77
Political Independence: Developed or Default Identity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80
What Is Political Independence? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81
Partisanship, Independence, and Voting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84
The Interaction of Parties with Political Identity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87
Evidence from Partisan Identification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89
Evidence from the ANES of Identity Statuses by Independence . . . . . . . 91
Evidence of Change in Youth Partisan Identification from 1952 to 2004 94
Evidence from 2008, 2012, and 2016 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96
Larger Questions for Consideration of Independents and 
Voting Behavior . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99
Conclusions of Political Independence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99
5 Bringing it All Together: Multivariate Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103
Why Use Multivariate Analysis? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104
Modeling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105
Bringing it All Together: Identity, Leaders, and Independents . . . . . . . . . 105
Identity Versus Control Measures: Evidence from the ANES . . . . . . . . . 105
Control Variables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105
Political Ego Identity Components on the ANES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106
Different Models of Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108
Inspirational Leaders and Youth Turnout . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108
Bringing it All Together: The Effect of Young Independents . . . . . . . . . . 111
Contents vii
Interest and Education: 2008 Multivariate Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 112
Identity, Income, Education, and Interest: 2012 Multivariate
Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113
Identity Matters: 2016 Multivariate Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114
6 Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117
The Larger Implications of Political Identity Development . . . . . . . . . . . 119
Influence of Other Actors on Political Identity Development . . . . . . . . . . 120
Voting and Identity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121
A Note on the Interaction Between Political Identity
Development and Social Identity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121
Consequences of Inspirational Leadership . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 122
The 2008 Candidates Beyond Party . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124
Developed and Default Political Independence of Youth . . . . . . . . . . . . . 126
Get Out the Vote Drives Targeting Youth: Nonpartisan
Organizations and Independents? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127
Consequences for the American Public . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 128
How America May Not Know Who It Is Anymore, and 
Why It Matters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 130
Linking Civic Engagement and Voting Behavior Through Identity
Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 131
Voter Registration Laws and Youth Turnout . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133
Final Thoughts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 134
Appendices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 137
Bibliography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 153
Chapter 1
Introduction
“Old enough to fight, old enough to vote” was a slogan used by voting advocates to
lower the voting age to 18 nationally, the same age that one could be drafted into
U.S. military service. The story of youth voting in the United States is of one fre-
quent of struggle, and still is today. The Twenty-Sixth Amendment to the Constitution
continues to be the quickest ratified amendment in American history; yet since its
passage in 1971, states have found ways to discourage voting by increasing voter
registration barriers for young people. Youth voter turnout in the United States has
variously increased and decreased over the years with little explanation of or
research about what encourages young people to vote.
In 2008, America saw record numbers of young people turn out at the polls. It
was perhaps the highest number of young voters, 18 to 24-year-olds, to turn out in
a presidential election in years. Expectations were high since an unprecedented
number of young people also turned out to primaries and caucuses earlier in the
year, and it was hoped that the election would be a change from the 1990s. In the
election of 2008, 48.5% of young people (18–24) turned out to vote—the highest
youth voter turnout since 1971. Nevertheless, with all of the focus on whether or not
young people would turn out and shift the course of the election, the media contin-
ued to highlight only the “low” voter turnout of America’s youngest voters.
But 2008 was not the beginning; youth turnout increased from 32.3% in 1996 to
41.9% in 2004 (Census Bureau 2009). Recent trends in increased youth turnout
need to be explained, which current voting behavior models fail to do because of
their focus on nonvoting rather than voting.
This is the story of those young people who do vote and why they vote; it is also
an attempt to explain the major differences between these young people and their
disengaged counterparts. If we look at what encourages and engages youth who cast
ballots, perhaps we can provide opportunities and possibilities to engage young vot-
ers. Traditionally, the voting and civic engagement literature has emphasized why
young people do not vote, citing such factors as lack of stability, limited investment
in politics, and age related barriers. While these are tested and widely cited explana-
tions for why young people do not vote, it is only half of the story.
© Springer International Publishing AG 2018 1
B. Gentry, Why Youth Vote, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-69608-9_1
2 1 Introduction
Young people who do vote know their political beliefs, they know who they are
as political persons, and choose to act on those beliefs and values. Young people
who have a political identity are more likely to vote than those who have not devel-
oped an identity. Learning to be a political person is a process, and for many this
process takes years, an evolution that begins in childhood and continues throughout
adulthood. The creation of a political identity is a socialization and internalization
process.
We learn about our world through parents, schools, media, and peers; we also
learn about the political world in much the same way. We become socialized to our
political environment over time through a variety of circumstances. By the time we
reach a voting-eligible age, we will have seen four presidential elections, although
we were not cognizant enough to remember the early ones. On the other hand,
developing into our own political personhood requires that we individualize as well.
While socializing can provide common ways of knowing about our political world,
individualization involves the formation of our own unique set of beliefs.
Individuation is a process wherein we begin to see the world differently from how
our parents, peers, teachers, and media experts see it. This process traditionally
begins in adolescence and continues through adulthood and is critical to our becom-
ing political individuals and separating ourselves out as unique, setting boundaries
between our beliefs and the beliefs of others; socialization is becoming a part of the
political world.
Understanding the deeper aspects of identity and identity formation is the key to
knowing why young people vote. The formation of a political identity and under-
standing the process of becoming a political person is the central element of this
book. A variety of sources, from interviews to focus groups to national data can help
us to better understand the process of individuation and assess its validity as an
explanation for youth voting. People form a political identity in a political context
or environment. Two major contexts for this research include the presence of inspi-
rational candidates and the political independence of individuals. Sometimes politi-
cal leaders and candidates can encourage identity formation in young potential
voters if those leaders tell the story of their own political identity and describe their
own process of becoming a political person. On the other hand, one’s identity can
often be formed around his or her partisan affiliation. However, political indepen-
dence itself—a disassociation from mainstream party structure—can also be an
affirmed and discernible identity.
Identity and Voting
Since 18-year-olds gained the right to vote in 1971, overall voter participation rates
have declined across most demographics. This trend is not found solely in the
United States but in other Western democracies as well (Franklin 2004). When it
became apparent that 18-year-olds did not turn out at rates similar to the rest of the
population, scholars began to question the differences in voter participation among
Why Study Young People? 3
different age groups (Converse and Niemi 1971). Other scholars began to focus on
positive environmental factors that may increase the civic engagement of youth,
such as parents as examples and discussion of politics with others (Flanagan 2003;
Gimpel et al. 2003)—influences on youth voting behavior that are more about the
process of socializing youth to become participants in our democracy. My goal is to
bridge the gap between voter participation (which does not necessarily reflect civic
engagement) and civic engagement (which does not necessarily precipitate voting)
by recreating a political identity variable that measures the status of development of
political identity in the individual and serves as a psychological assessment of an
individual’s perception of who he or she is politically. The more someone knows
about himself politically, the more likely he will participate in the political process
and eventually vote; concomitantly, the less a person knows about himself politi-
cally, the less likely he is to participate in politics, voting, or civic life. Those with a
consolidated identity are more likely to be able to stand up for their beliefs, address
adversity, and act on their commitments and affiliations.
This study uses psychology to understand the behavior of voting. Our identity,
which has many facets, not only determines who we are but also what we do.
Political scientists take for granted political party affiliation, ideology, and political
beliefs without considering how and why these are formed. Political identity is a
concept that unites what we take for granted with an understanding that there was a
formation process of identity development and how it affects voting behavior.
Why Study Young People?
Scholars often cite characteristics of youth to explain why youth do not participate.
Youth participation rates are notoriously low, both in presidential and off-year elec-
tions, hovering below 50% in presidential elections since 1972 and below 30% in
off-year elections (Census Bureau 2009). Youth have particularly low political
knowledge and political interest, suggesting that age increases both interest and
knowledge in the political system (Campbell et al. 1960). Young voters are difficult
to contact and difficult to keep in touch with since their living situation is ever
changing; some live with their parents, others move away to college, and still others
move out to start their own lives, changing residences along the way. Such move-
ment makes it difficult for scholars to study, survey, or sample young voters consis-
tently and with confidence (Wolfinger and Rosenstone 1980; Highton and Wolfinger
2001). Nevertheless, this group has the potential to provide us with insight into how
interactions with the political system are unique for each individual. It is during the
years of early adulthood when one officially interacts with the political system as a
voter, and there are many “firsts” for youth to overcome: registration, finding the
polling place, and gaining political information about the process and candidates
(Plutzer 2002; Highton and Wolfinger 2001).
Youth are also under-sampled as participants because we tend to acknowledge
them as nonparticipants and focus our efforts on explaining the lack of turnout