An Experimental Test of Mobilization Effects in a Latino Community

• Author: Gregg R. Murray,Richard E. Matland
• Date: 01 March 2012
• Published date: 01 March 2012
• DOI: 10.1177/1065912910388192
• Subject Matter: Articles

Political Research Quarterly

65(1) 192 –205

© 2012 University of Utah

Reprints and permission:

sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav

DOI: 10.1177/1065912910388192

http://prq.sagepub.com

By using a field experiment to test the effects of a non-

partisan get-out-the-vote (GOTV) message we wish to

contribute to two separate literatures. First, we add to the

liter ature on the effectiveness of GOTV techniques. In

recent years there has been a surge in field experiments

testing various mobilization methods (Gerber and Green

2000a, 2000b, 2001; Gerber, Green, and Larimer 2008; Green

and Gerber 2008; Green, Gerber, and Nickerson 2003a,

2003b; Michelson 2003, 2006a, 2006b; Michelson, Garcia

Bedolla, and McConnell 2009; Nickerson 2008). These

experiments provide evidence that GOTV can increase

turnout, when implemented correctly. These previously

published field experiments have been conducted, how-

ever, during nonpresidential elections when turnout has

generally been low. We test for effects in the context of a

presidential election where we would expect higher base

turnout. Furthermore, the experimental population in most

previous studies has been primarily Anglo. We add to this

literature by testing for effects in a new context (a presiden-

tial election) and for an understudied population (Latino

voters).

Our second goal is to propose and test a model of voter

turnout. Our model takes Zaller’s receive–accept–sample

(RAS) model and adapts it to the vote decision. After

describing the model, we make connections between the

voter turnout and mobilization literatures. Based on our

turnout model we develop specific predictions as to how

different types of voters (habitual, episodic, and registered

nonvoters) are likely to respond to GOTV messages. Fol-

lowing the presentation of the results, we conclude with a

discussion of implications for voter mobilization and our

model of voter turnout.

Previous Mobilization Research

Using Field Experiments

In recent years, a body of mobilization research has deve-

loped using field experiments. Green and Gerber (2008),

who have contributed significantly to this literature, sur-

veyed the existing evidence. The findings are consistent

but not uniform. Door-to-door canvassing has a strong

positive effect. Telephone calls vary considerably in their

effectiveness. When delivered in a personal and engaging

manner they can motivate voters to turnout, while if the

delivery is wooden, hurried, and focused on simply read-

ing a script, they are ineffective (Nickerson 2007). Direct

mail effects are small, although effects appear somewhat

larger for mailings that invoke social pressure to get peo-

ple to the polls (Green, Aronow, and McGrath 2010), while

e-mail and automated phone calling (“robo calls”) provide

no detectable increase in turnout. To generalize broadly, the

more personal the contact, the more effective the method.

388192PRQ

1Loyola University Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA

2Texas Tech University, Lubbock, TX, USA

Corresponding Author:

Richard E. Matland, Loyola University Chicago, Department of

Political Science, 326 Coffey Hall, 1032 W. Sheridan Road,

Chicago, IL 60626

Email: rmatlan@luc.edu

An Experimental Test of Mobilization

Effects in a Latino Community

Richard E. Matland1 and Gregg R. Murray2

Abstract

This article describes a field experiment designed to test the efficacy of get-out-the-vote (GOTV) techniques in a new

context and for an understudied population. It evaluates the effectiveness of nonpartisan GOTV messages delivered

via personal contact and mail in a heavily Latino community during the 2004 presidential campaign. It proposes and

tests an alternative model of voter turnout based on Zaller’s receive–accept–sample model of public opinion. The

findings are consistent with the authors’ predictions; mobilization efforts increase turnout, but mobilization effects vary

across citizens based on their propensity to vote. There is a large increase among episodic voters but little increase

among habitual or registered nonvoters.

Keywords

elections and voting behavior, public opinion and political participation, race, ethnicity, politics, political methodology