Understanding Choice Behavior in Political Marketing Context: A Favorable Voter Responses Model
Explaining voters’ political choices, understanding the decision making mechanisms behind and predicting these choices are unarguably one of the most important subjects of both business and political worlds. An attempt to cover this literature suggests th
- PDF / 194,458 Bytes
- 4 Pages / 595.276 x 790.866 pts Page_size
- 84 Downloads / 147 Views
survey comprised of four sections, namely individual characteristics, economical voting behavior variables as expectations and evaluations, heuristic voting behavior variables as leader and party image, identification variables as fit perceptions, and dependent variable as voting intention. Second wave aimed to get the actual vote choice together with loyalty, confidence, promoting, and donating behavior for the party that respondents actually voted for. The hypothesized model is investigated by using Structural Equations Modeling in AMOS. Measures All measures are content validated and empirically tested on student samples to come up with balanced and reliable scales, and are used with five-point Likert scales (1 = strongly disagree, 5 = strongly agree). Sociotropic expectations measure the altruistic and societal benefits that are expected from the party if it is elected to be part of the government. Scale has four items (e.g. “Turkey becomes a more developed and advanced country,” “Turkey becomes a country in peace and unity,” “Turkey becomes a more liveable country,” “Turkey becomes a safer country”). Egocentric expectations reflect the personal and egoistic perspective of prospective expectations. A four-item scale is used with items such as “I and my close friends and relatives can become richer and more successful,” “I and my close friends and relatives can earn many things,” “New opportunities might emerge for my friends and relatives,” “My pocketbook income increases”. Party and leader image scale is adopted from Kaid (2004). Image has two dimensions namely responsiveness and competence. Responsiveness indicates the character based personality traits and includes four-items which are “Honest,” “Believable,” “Sincere,” and “Tolerant” asked both for the party and the leader. Competence shows the extent of the candidate in terms of capability and includes five items which are “Expert,” “Successful,” “Strong,” “Hardworking,” and “Open to development,” again asked both for the party and the leader. (Contrary to our expectations, exploratory factor analysis did not differentiate on leader and party image. Instead, the sample shows leader and party perceptions together indicate the two dimensions of responsiveness and competence.) Fit perception scales are specially formulated for this study and items are adopted and modified from Callero (1985) identity salience scale. Identity fit is conceptualized as the extent to which one perceives herself as part of the party. It is in fact a matching process of party’s personality in terms of its people. The scale includes three items which are “People in this party are similar to me,” “This party accounts for an important part of an who I am,” “I am a part of this party.” On the other hand, assessments of ideology fit concern the world views and ideas in a party. It is a matching process of party’s manifest. The scale includes three-items (e.g., “I have the same world view with this party,” “This party’s world view and what it wants to perform are compatible with mine,” “I
Data Loading...
