close× Call Us
close×
Title White Identity and Vote Choice
Post date 01/31/2019
C1 Background and Explanation of Rationale In this paper we focus on data analysis that explores the relationship between voting behavior, white identity, beliefs about how a candidate will help whites, and political ideology. We utilize a survey to measure both white voters’ extent of linked fate with other whites and also their perception of which presidential candidate will most benefit white voters. Together these two measures provide us with the ability to identify relationship between white linked fate, perception of the political candidates, and voting decisions.
C2 What are the hypotheses to be tested?

H1: Among Democratic voters, the probability of voting for Trump will be higher among those who express White identity and believe that Trump will make things better for whites than will the probability of voting for Trump among other Democrats. [and do not think Clinton will make things better for whites]

H2: Among Republican voters, the probability of voting for Clinton will be higher among those who express high White identity and believe that Clinton will make things better for whites than will the probability of voting for Clinton among other Republicans. [and do not think Trump will make things better for whites].

H3: For Republican [Democratic] party identifiers the relationship between white identity and voting for Trump [Clinton] will be stronger for those ideologically distant from Trump [Clinton] than those who are ideologically similar to Trump [Clinton].

H4: For voters who identify with a political party those who report high linked fate and believe that the candidate from their party will make things better for whites will evaluate that candidate more favorably than will other voters in their party, all else equal.

C3 How will these hypotheses be tested? * The source of our data is the 2016 CCES survey that included a module added by faculty at UC-Riverside. This module includes multiple questions that assess linked fate and its importance among voters. We also use other data from the CCES common content data set.
C4 Country United States
C5 Scale (# of Units) ~1000
C6 Was a power analysis conducted prior to data collection? No
C7 Has this research received Insitutional Review Board (IRB) or ethics committee approval? Yes
C8 IRB Number HS-16-145
C9 Date of IRB Approval August 15, 2016
C10 Will the intervention be implemented by the researcher or a third party? not provided by authors
C11 Did any of the research team receive remuneration from the implementing agency for taking part in this research? No
C12 If relevant, is there an advance agreement with the implementation group that all results can be published? Yes
C13 JEL Classification(s) not provided by authors