Persuasion, surveillance, and voting behavior

Alan E. Gross; Michael J. Schmidt; John P. Keating; Michael J. Saks

doi:10.1016/0022-1031(74)90013-4

Persuasion, surveillance, and voting behavior

Alan E. Gross
, Michael J. Schmidt
, John P. Keating
, Michael J. Saks

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

6 Scopus citations

Abstract

More than 4000 students received one of three letters urging them to vote in a campus primary election. Two letters suggesting that voting behavior would be monitored produced 37% turnout compared with 32% for a nonsurveillance letter and 26% for noletter controls. Differences among these three groups are significant at p < .01. The letters also increased turnout in a runoff election held one week after the primary; however there were no differences among the three letters. These results are discussed in terms of Thibaut and Kelley's three-step process for enforcing group norms.

Original language	English (US)
Pages (from-to)	451-460
Number of pages	10
Journal	Journal of Experimental Social Psychology
Volume	10
Issue number	5
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-1031(74)90013-4
State	Published - Sep 1974
Externally published	Yes

ASJC Scopus subject areas

Social Psychology
Sociology and Political Science

Access to Document

10.1016/0022-1031(74)90013-4

Cite this

@article{5f534e45da8141f5b6173593b7cdc88a,

title = "Persuasion, surveillance, and voting behavior",

abstract = "More than 4000 students received one of three letters urging them to vote in a campus primary election. Two letters suggesting that voting behavior would be monitored produced 37\% turnout compared with 32\% for a nonsurveillance letter and 26\% for noletter controls. Differences among these three groups are significant at p < .01. The letters also increased turnout in a runoff election held one week after the primary; however there were no differences among the three letters. These results are discussed in terms of Thibaut and Kelley's three-step process for enforcing group norms.",

author = "Gross, \{Alan E.\} and Schmidt, \{Michael J.\} and Keating, \{John P.\} and Saks, \{Michael J.\}",

note = "Funding Information: {\textquoteleft}This research was partially supported by National Institute of Mental Health Grant MH18672 to A. Gross and I. Piliavin, and by funds from the Ohio State University Department of Psychology. Thanks to Nancy Broerman, Diane Driscoll, Merry Edison, Jay Fisher, Bruce Gellerman, Michael Harris, Ella O{\textquoteright}Callaghan, Richard Podolin, Vicki Schenendorf and Linda WieIgos for clerical help, and to Gary Burger, Phillip Burgess, Duane Essex, Anthony G. Greenwald, Bibb Latank and Thomas M. Ostrom for advice and comments. Requests for reprints should be sent to Alan E. Cross, who is now at University of Missouri, Department of Psychology, 8001 Natural Bridge Road, St. Louis, Missouri 63121. *Now at the University of Washington. a Now at Boston College,",

year = "1974",

month = sep,

doi = "10.1016/0022-1031(74)90013-4",

language = "English (US)",

volume = "10",

pages = "451--460",

journal = "Journal of Experimental Social Psychology",

issn = "0022-1031",

publisher = "Academic Press Inc.",

number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Persuasion, surveillance, and voting behavior

AU - Gross, Alan E.

AU - Schmidt, Michael J.

AU - Keating, John P.

AU - Saks, Michael J.

N1 - Funding Information: ‘This research was partially supported by National Institute of Mental Health Grant MH18672 to A. Gross and I. Piliavin, and by funds from the Ohio State University Department of Psychology. Thanks to Nancy Broerman, Diane Driscoll, Merry Edison, Jay Fisher, Bruce Gellerman, Michael Harris, Ella O’Callaghan, Richard Podolin, Vicki Schenendorf and Linda WieIgos for clerical help, and to Gary Burger, Phillip Burgess, Duane Essex, Anthony G. Greenwald, Bibb Latank and Thomas M. Ostrom for advice and comments. Requests for reprints should be sent to Alan E. Cross, who is now at University of Missouri, Department of Psychology, 8001 Natural Bridge Road, St. Louis, Missouri 63121. *Now at the University of Washington. a Now at Boston College,

PY - 1974/9

Y1 - 1974/9

N2 - More than 4000 students received one of three letters urging them to vote in a campus primary election. Two letters suggesting that voting behavior would be monitored produced 37% turnout compared with 32% for a nonsurveillance letter and 26% for noletter controls. Differences among these three groups are significant at p < .01. The letters also increased turnout in a runoff election held one week after the primary; however there were no differences among the three letters. These results are discussed in terms of Thibaut and Kelley's three-step process for enforcing group norms.

AB - More than 4000 students received one of three letters urging them to vote in a campus primary election. Two letters suggesting that voting behavior would be monitored produced 37% turnout compared with 32% for a nonsurveillance letter and 26% for noletter controls. Differences among these three groups are significant at p < .01. The letters also increased turnout in a runoff election held one week after the primary; however there were no differences among the three letters. These results are discussed in terms of Thibaut and Kelley's three-step process for enforcing group norms.

UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/0016260063

UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/0016260063#tab=citedBy

U2 - 10.1016/0022-1031(74)90013-4

DO - 10.1016/0022-1031(74)90013-4

M3 - Article

SN - 0022-1031

VL - 10

SP - 451

EP - 460

JO - Journal of Experimental Social Psychology

JF - Journal of Experimental Social Psychology

IS - 5

ER -

Persuasion, surveillance, and voting behavior

Abstract

ASJC Scopus subject areas

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this