Explaining the (non-) Use of Voting Advice Applications

Voting requires lots of information. In most democracies, elections leave voters with dozens, if not thousands, of voting possibilities. Voting Advice Applications (VAAs) have primarily been recognized as a guide for voters through their electoral decision-making. However, the use of such digital tools is still limited. In this paper, we analyze how voters’ characteristics affect the use of VAAs and what makes individuals not use the application. We present the results of a panel survey where we randomly invited part of the survey respondents to use a VAA during an electoral campaign in the canton of Bern, Switzerland. Our results show that while significant differences exist between respondents in and out of the experimental setting, political knowledge, and interest are consistent drivers of VAA use. Additionally, we show that more than half of non-VAA users indicate that they do not need assistance from a VAA as a reason for not using the tool and that factors influencing this reason are similar to factors that affect the use of VAAs. In doing so, we add to the literature on the use and biases of VAAs and the general understanding of why people use or don’t use digital tools.

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Open Access CRIS of the University of Bern
Published
2024-09-09
DOI
https://doi.org/10.48620/7335
Primary Topic
Evolution and Paleontology Studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Explaining the (non-) Use of Voting Advice Applications

Open Access CRIS of the University of Bern
Evolution and Paleontology Studies
article

Explaining the (non-) Use of Voting Advice Applications

article en

Abstract

Voting requires lots of information. In most democracies, elections leave voters with dozens, if not thousands, of voting possibilities. Voting Advice Applications (VAAs) have primarily been recognized as a guide for voters through their electoral decision-making. However, the use of such digital tools is still limited. In this paper, we analyze how voters’ characteristics affect the use of VAAs and what makes individuals not use the application. We present the results of a panel survey where we randomly invited part of the survey respondents to use a VAA during an electoral campaign in the canton of Bern, Switzerland. Our results show that while significant differences exist between respondents in and out of the experimental setting, political knowledge, and interest are consistent drivers of VAA use. Additionally, we show that more than half of non-VAA users indicate that they do not need assistance from a VAA as a reason for not using the tool and that factors influencing this reason are similar to factors that affect the use of VAAs. In doing so, we add to the literature on the use and biases of VAAs and the general understanding of why people use or don’t use digital tools.

Open Access CRIS of the University of Bern
Czech Academy of Sciences, Institute of Computer Science (CZ)
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 52%
Evolution and Paleontology Studies
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Explaining the (non-) Use of Voting Advice Applications · Open Access CRIS of the University of Bern (2024) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS