Skip to main content
    • Aa
    • Aa
  • Get access
    Check if you have access via personal or institutional login
  • Cited by 74
  • Cited by
    This article has been cited by the following publications. This list is generated based on data provided by CrossRef.

    Morey, Alyssa C. and Eveland, William P. 2016. Measures of Political Talk Frequency: Assessing Reliability and Meaning. Communication Methods and Measures, Vol. 10, Issue. 1, p. 51.

    Sohn, Dongyoung and Geidner, Nick 2016. Collective Dynamics of the Spiral of Silence: The Role of Ego-Network Size. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, Vol. 28, Issue. 1, p. 25.

    Box-Steffensmeier, Janet Dillard, Micah Kimball, David and Massengill, William 2015. The long and short of it: The unpredictability of late deciding voters. Electoral Studies, Vol. 39, p. 181.

    Campus, Donatella Ceccarini, Luigi and Vaccari, Cristian 2015. What a Difference a Critical Election Makes: Social Networks and Political Discussion in Italy Between 2008 and 2013. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, Vol. 27, Issue. 4, p. 588.

    Landa, Dimitri and Duell, Dominik 2015. Social Identity and Electoral Accountability. American Journal of Political Science, Vol. 59, Issue. 3, p. 671.

    Lup, Oana 2015. Informal Political Conversation in Old and New Democracies in a Comparative Perspective. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, p. edv039.

    Neiheisel, Jacob R. and Niebler, Sarah 2015. On the Limits of Persuasion: Campaign Ads and the Structure of Voters’ Interpersonal Discussion Networks. Political Communication, Vol. 32, Issue. 3, p. 434.

    Pooley, Jefferson D. 2015. Mnemonic Multiples: The Case of the Columbia Panel Studies. Journal of the History of the Behavioral Sciences, Vol. 51, Issue. 1, p. 10.

    Wallsten, Kevin and Tarsi, Melinda 2015. Persuasion from Below?. Journalism Practice, p. 1.

    Bolsen, Toby Ferraro, Paul J. and Miranda, Juan Jose 2014. Are Voters More Likely to Contribute to Other Public Goods? Evidence from a Large-Scale Randomized Policy Experiment. American Journal of Political Science, Vol. 58, Issue. 1, p. 17.

    Dilliplane, Susanna 2014. Activation, Conversion, or Reinforcement? The Impact of Partisan News Exposure on Vote Choice. American Journal of Political Science, Vol. 58, Issue. 1, p. 79.

    Fernández-Gracia, Juan Suchecki, Krzysztof Ramasco, José J. San Miguel, Maxi and Eguíluz, Víctor M. 2014. Is the Voter Model a Model for Voters?. Physical Review Letters, Vol. 112, Issue. 15,

    Higgins, Nicholas 2014. Religious influences on Latino ideology and vote choice: are Evangelical Catholics different?. Politics, Groups, and Identities, Vol. 2, Issue. 3, p. 402.

    Makse, Todd Minkoff, Scott L. and Sokhey, Anand E. 2014. Networks, context, and the use of spatially weighted survey metrics. Political Geography, Vol. 42, p. 79.

    Markaki, Evangelia N. Chadjipandelis, Theodore and Tomaras, Petros 2014. How Data Management Helps the Information Management: Regrouping Data Using Principal Components Analysis. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, Vol. 147, p. 554.

    Sokhey, Anand E. and Djupe, Paul A. 2014. Name generation in interpersonal political network data: Results from a series of experiments. Social Networks, Vol. 36, p. 147.

    van Doorn, Bas W. 2014. What is Important? The Impact of Interpersonal Political Discussion on Public Agendas. Social Science Quarterly, Vol. 95, Issue. 1, p. 132.

    Bauer, Nichole M. 2013. Rethinking stereotype reliance. Politics and the Life Sciences, Vol. 32, Issue. 1, p. 22.

    Borah, Porismita Edgerly, Stephanie Vraga, Emily K. and Shah, Dhavan V. 2013. Hearing and Talking to the Other Side: Antecedents of Cross-Cutting Exposure in Adolescents. Mass Communication and Society, Vol. 16, Issue. 3, p. 391.

    Ellithorpe, Morgan E. Holbert, R. Lance and Palmer-Wackerly, Angela L. 2013. Procrastination and the Shifting Political Media Environment: An Experimental Study of Media Choice Affecting a Democratic Outcome. Communication Studies, Vol. 64, Issue. 5, p. 561.


The Social Calculus of Voting: Interpersonal, Media, and Organizational Influences on Presidential Choices

  • DOI:
  • Published online: 01 March 2002

Voting choices are a product of both personal attitudes and social contexts, of a personal and a social calculus. Research has illuminated the personal calculus of voting, but the social calculus has received little attention since the 1940s. This study expands our understanding of the social influences on individual choice by examining the relationship of partisan biases in media, organizational, and interpersonal intermediaries to the voting choices of Americans. Its results show that the traditional sources of social influence still dominate: Interpersonal discussion outweighs the media in affecting the vote. Media effects appear to be the product of newspaper editorial pages rather than television or newspaper reporting, which contain so little perceptible bias that they often are misperceived as hostile. Parties and secondary organizations also are influential, but only for less interested voters—who are more affected by social contexts in general. Overall, this study demonstrates that democratic citizens are embedded in social contexts that join with personal traits in shaping their voting decisions.

Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

American Political Science Review
  • ISSN: 0003-0554
  • EISSN: 1537-5943
  • URL: /core/journals/american-political-science-review
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *