Get Out the Vote Canvassing & Psychology
Just before the 2016 election, I had just finished turning in my dissertation (Raab, 2016) and was ready to move on to the next thing in my career. Because of personal circumstances, I didn’t have things lined up for immediate embarkment. Then, the 2016 election happened. I decided to use my knowledge of quantitative psychology in politics, a subject I had little interest in. No. That’s not quite right. It’s more like I avoided it for many years. I grew up in a political family and was cynical about it. I had an insider’s perspective on politics that started very young. Being opinionated and outspoken was never an issue. Doing something about it was. So, after the 2016 election and the Women’s March, I looked out for something to do.
All canvassing efforts and tactics are vital. If you’re thinking about or have decided on doing Get Out the Vote canvassing. Thank you! That’s time well spent. You may be wondering: what’s the best way to do it? Are there any super effective canvassing strategies? First, let’s talk a little about political behavior and psychology. Voting is a behavior which has a lot of nuance to it.
Applying Psychology to Political Messaging
Back in 2017 one political group that I found was PA12 for Progress, which was rebranding. I went from just protesting to being the director of messaging. I used my knowledge of psychology and psychological metrics to inform political messaging strategies. My first order of business was to make the group one that other groups look to so that any political messaging we did would be amplified. Then, in the messaging on issues, there was always the appeal to emotion, specifically outrage. This was the most motivating emotion at the time and for the intended audience. I tested political messaging by talking to folks at the weekly protests and seeing what posts did well among other quantitative measurement strategies. Politics is an iterative process requiring frequent psychological testing because everything can change fast and with the next news cycle. The tactics that I used then may or may not work now. The motivating emotion for desired behavior is probably different now. In fact, I'd bet on it.
Understanding Voter Behavior: Partisan Groups & Nonpartisan Groups
As of writing this post, the primary political behavior everyone in the US is interested in is voting. For partisan groups, it's getting people to the polls to vote for their party candidates. For nonpartisan community groups, it's getting people to the polls to support an issue or exercise their right to vote and have their voice heard. So, which canvassing tactic is going to be the most effective? What political messaging? Well. Science tells us it all depends (Arceneaux & Nickerson, 2009).
Stakes & Motivation in Elections
Let's start with two factors that affect voter behavior: the stakes of the election and how motivated the individuals are to vote.
High-Stakes or Low-Stakes Elections
Local elections tend to be viewed as low stakes for some reason, even though local politics arguably can have a greater impact on an individual's daily life. For better or worse, that is the perception of local elections.
The first question is already answered—this is a high-stakes election.
Motivation: Low, Medium, and High-Propensity Voters
Then, we have to answer the second question related to voter behavior: How motivated is the individual? Political canvassers generally depend on voting records to identify people's voting frequency or whether they are registered to vote. From this, individuals are categorized into low, medium, and high-propensity voters. Then, canvassers can employ a number of GOTV tactics, ranging from face-to-face and door-to-door canvassing, text messaging, and events, as seen with the Swifties campaigning for VP Harris, amongst others (Meet the Swifties Campaigning for Kamala Harris | WIRED, n.d.). Which canvassing tactic should you use? You may have limited funds if you run an organization, or you have limited time if you're a volunteer.
Effective GOTV Canvassing Tactics
In a high-stakes election amongst medium propensity voters, there is some evidence to suggest that face-to-face canvassing campaigns would be effective (Arceneaux & Nickerson, 2009). For whatever campaign tactic you choose, you can expect some degree of spillover from the person you intervened with (whether through text or conversation) to the other members of their household (Hirvonen et al., 2024). What about the low-propensity voters? Should we badger them into submission with canvassing strategies until they promise that they will vote? You could do that, but you may want to slow down and think about it. Hear me out.
Behavioral Change and Voting Habits
One study suggested that voting may be habitual (Gerber et al., 2003). This means that the behavior is changeable. There is an entire field of research dedicated to looking at how people change their behavior and how to inspire that change: psychology. There is so much research on how to accomplish this that it takes years of study to gain any kind of expertise in it. But in a nutshell, if a behavior is, in fact, changeable (some behaviors are less so), then there are things that other people around the individual of interest can do to increase the probability that the change of behavior will occur. There are also things that will ensure that a person will dig their heels in and ignore you. Badgering them into agreeing to vote will do the latter.
The Psychology of Behavior Change in Canvassing
I remember an event I helped to organize where one of the canvassing trainers was advising canvassers to argue with people into agreeing with you on an issue. I told him that’s not a good idea based on psychological science. He said this is politics. I appreciated his enthusiasm but people are still people even in politics. Political science scholarly research is showing that. So when you’re canvassing, if you run into resistance, that’s a good moment to listen with empathy. Not only will it plant seeds for future conversations and possible conversions, but it will also give a cornucopia of mineable quantitative data.
Conclusion: Using Data to Improve Canvassing Efforts
For advice on how to increase the probability of voter behavior change or how to collect quantitative data from canvassing conversations and analyze that data, feel free to give me a call. I’m a market research consultant, program evaluation specialist, and psychometrician specializing in behavioral science marketing/messaging and community outreach.
Citations
https://www.wired.com/story/swifties-campaigning-for-kamala-harris/
Arceneaux, K., & Nickerson, D. W. (2009). Who Is Mobilized to Vote? A Re‐Analysis of 11 Field Experiments. American Journal of Political Science, 53(1), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5907.2008.00354.xhttp://hdl.handle.net/10125/51403
