Skip to main content
Log in

Do people care about democracy? An experiment exploring the value of voting rights

  • Published:
Public Choice Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In almost all democratic national elections an individual vote cannot change the election outcome. The fact that many individuals nevertheless participate voluntarily in such elections suggests that people do care about democracy as such. This experiment investigates the value of democratic voting rights by providing participants the chance to sell them. More specifically, an incentive compatible mechanism is used to elicit the willingness-to-accept value of the voting right in the election of the German Bundestag on 16 October 1994. A postexperimental questionnaire makes it possible to assess the relative importance of answers to the frequently raised question: Why do people vote?

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Akerlof, G.A. and Dickens, W.T. (1982). The economic consequences of cognitive dissonance. American Economic Review 72(June): 307-319.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barzel, V. and Silberberg, E. (1973). Is the act of voting rational? Public Choice 16(Fall): 51-58.

    Google Scholar 

  • Becker, G., de Groot, M.H. and Marshak, J. (1963). An experimental study of some stochastic models for wagers. Behavioral Science 8: 199-202.

    Google Scholar 

  • Downs, A. (1957). An economic theory of democracy. New York: Harper & Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ferejohn, J.A. and Fiorina, M.P. (1974). The paradox of not voting: A decision-theoretic analysis. American Political Science Review 68: 525-536.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ferejohn, J.A. and Fiorina, M.P. (1975). Closeness counts only in horseshoes and dancing. American Political Science Review 69: 920-925.

    Google Scholar 

  • Festinger, L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Evanslon, IL: Roar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fiorina, M.P. (1976). The voting decision: Instrumental and expressive aspects. Journal of Politics 38: 390-413.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guttman, J.M., Hilger, N. and Shachmurove, Y. (1994). Voting as investment vs. voting as consumption: New evidence. Kyklos 47: 197-207.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harsanyi, J.C. (1979). Bayesian decision theory, rule utilitarism, and Arrow's impossibility theorem. Theory and Decision 11: 289-317.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kant, I. (1785). Groundwork of the metaphysics of morals. Translated and analysed by P.J. Paton. New York: Harper & Row, 1964.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kirchgässner, G. (1992). Towards a theory of low-cost decisions. European Journal of Political Economy 8: 305-320.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kliemt, H. (1986). The veil of insignificance. European Journal of Political Economy 2/3: 333-344.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kruse, H., Berg, E. and Weber, M. (1993). Erklären unternehmensspezifische Faktoren den Kursunterschied von Stamm-und Vorzugsaktien? Zeitschrift für Bankrecht und Bankwirtschaft 5: 23-31.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mueller, D.C. (1989). Public choice II. 2nd ed. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nannestad, P. and Paldam, M. (1994). The VP-function: A survey of the literature on vote and popularity after 25 years. Public Choice 79: 213-245.

    Google Scholar 

  • Quattrone, G.A. and Tversky, A. (1985). Self-deception and the voter's illusion. In J. Elster (Ed.), The multiple self, 35-58. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Riker, W.H. and Ordeshook, P.C. (1968). A theory of the calculus of voting. American Political Science Review 62: 25-42.

    Google Scholar 

  • Römer, A.U. (1991). Der kontingente Bewertungsansatz: Eine geeignete Methode zur Bewertung umweltverbessernder Maßnahmen? Zeitschrift für Umweltpolitik und Umweltrecht 4: 411-456.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schram, A.J.H.C. (1991). Voter behavior in economic perspective. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schram, A. and Sonnemans, J. (1996a). Voter turnout as a participation game: An experimental investigation. International Journal of Game Theory 25: 385-406.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schram, A. and Sonnemans, J. (1996b). Why people vote: Experimental evidence. Journal of Economic Psychology 17: 417-442.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schram, A. and van Winden, F. (1994). Why people vote: The role of inter-and intragroup interaction in the turnout decision. In H. Brandstätter and W. Güth (Eds.), Essays on Economic Psychology. 213-250. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stigler, G. (1972). Economic competition and political competition. Public Choice 13(Fall): 91-106.

    Google Scholar 

  • Struthers, J. and Young, A. (1989). Economics of voting: Theories and evidence. Journal of Economic Studies 16/5: 1-42.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tullock, G. (1967). Toward mathematics of politics. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weber, M., Berg, E. and Kruse, H. (1992). Kurs-und Renditevergleich von Stamm-und Vorzugsaktien - Eine empirischeAnalyse. Zeitschrift für betriebswirtschaftlicheForschung 44/6: 548-565.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Güth, W., Weck-Hannemann, H. Do people care about democracy? An experiment exploring the value of voting rights. Public Choice 91, 27–47 (1997). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1004972900845

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1004972900845

Keywords