The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Getting Out the Vote: Participation in Gubernatorial Elections
Abstract
Scholarship on electoral turnout has long emphasized two main themes: explanations of nonvoting in terms of individual characteristics and in terms of contextual variables. These investigations have deeply enriched our understanding of electoral participation, but their limitations have also sensitized us to the remaining problems of explanation. Perusal of the work on American politics exposes a rather striking tendency in studies of participation to ignore, or soft pedal, the effects of active political mobilization. In this article we formulate two models of electoral turnout—socioeconomic and political mobilization—and apply them to aggregate data on voting in gubernatorial elections of 1978 and 1980. The socioeconomic model of turnout includes such influences as income, age, and educational attainment. To assess the effects of political mobilization, we have considered campaign spending, partisan competition, electoral margin, and the presence or absence of a simultaneous race for the United States Senate. Both of the models perform quite well individually, producing significant and meaningful coefficients and adequate fits. Yet in the final analysis we demonstrate that quite apart from major sources of variation in gubernatorial turnout—such as region and presidential versus nonpresidential years—the mobilizing influences of campaign activism and competitiveness have a strong impact on electoral participation; electoral law, i.e., closing date of registration, retains a small but significant effect on voting for governor; and socioeconomic characteristics, included in a fully specified model, have little to contribute independently to an explanation of electoral turnout. These findings are very much in the same vein as related cross-national investigations, which emphasize the crucial role of electoral law and political parties and downplay individual characteristics as determinants of electoral participation. On the basis of the research reported here, we argue that scholars need to pay more attention to political mobilization as an explanation of electoral turnout.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
American Voter Turnout in Comparative Perspective
Powell, G. B. (1986) · American Political Science Review · doi:10.2307/1957082 · Cited by 1,049
Explaining voter turnout: A review of aggregate-level research
Geys, B. (2006) · Electoral Studies · doi:10.1016/j.electstud.2005.09.002 · Cited by 860
(2000) · doi:10.1016/s0261-3794(99)00028-1 · Cited by 620
Attitudes, Opportunities and Incentives: A Field Essay on Political Participation
Leighley, J. E. (1995) · Political Research Quarterly · doi:10.1177/106591299504800111 · Cited by 462
The Myth of the Vanishing Voter
McDonald, M. P., & Popkin, S. L. (2001) · American Political Science Review · doi:10.1017/s0003055400400134 · Cited by 448
Metadata
- Authors
- Patterson, S. C., & Caldeira, G. A.
- Venue
- American Political Science Review
- Publisher
- Cambridge University Press (CUP)
- Published
- 1983-09
- Volume
- 77
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 675-689
- ISSN
- 0003-0554 (ISSN-L)
- 1537-5943
- OpenAlex
- W2119820089
- Cited by
- 244
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 51.07
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Getting Out the Vote: Participation in Gubernatorial Elections. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2307/1957267
- The paper
- Patterson, S. C., & Caldeira, G. A. (1983). Getting Out the Vote: Participation in Gubernatorial Elections. American Political Science Review. https://doi.org/10.2307/1957267
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.