The DOI matches its Crossref record.
The Nonvoting Voter in Voting Research
Abstract
Postelection surveys consistently overestimate voter turnout by a substantial margin. This paper compares, via discriminant analysis of data from the 1978 National Election Study, the characteristics of respondents who falsely claim to have voted with the characteristics of actual voters and admitted nonvoters. More importantly, it undertakes two parallel analyses of the factors affecting voting or nonvoting. The first employs respondent-supplied voting data, and the second employs officially validated voting data. Even though misreporters differ in some respects from actual voters and admitted nonvoters, the parallel analyses in the latter part of the paper indicate that substantive conclusions about the factors that influence voting or nonvoting are largely unaffected by the use of validated as opposed to reported voting data.
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
Krosnick, J. A. (1999) · Annual Review of Psychology · doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.50.1.537 · Cited by 1,852
Cost of Voting in the American States
Li, Q., Pomante, M. J., & Schraufnagel, S. (2018) · Election Law Journal: Rules, Politics, and Policy · doi:10.1089/elj.2017.0478 · Cited by 76
Metadata
- Authors
- Sigelman, L.
- Venue
- American Journal of Political Science
- Publisher
- JSTOR
- Published
- 1982-02
- Volume
- 26
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 47
- ISSN
- 0092-5853 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2015245186
- Cited by
- 163
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 41.16
- 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: The Nonvoting Voter in Voting Research. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2307/2110838
- The paper
- Sigelman, L. (1982). The Nonvoting Voter in Voting Research. American Journal of Political Science. https://doi.org/10.2307/2110838
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.
