Thinking Ideologically: The Limited Role of Left and Right Labels as Policy Shortcuts

Abstract How do voters use left-right ideological labels as shortcuts for policy positions in evaluating electoral candidates? We offer a distinction between maximal and minimal forms of ideological thinking. While maximal thinking implies that voters rely on ideological proximity as a proxy for policy congruence with candidates, minimal thinking requires only that voters use ideological labels to infer candidates’ positions—even if their own ideological identification is inconsistent with policy preferences. Drawing on original experimental data from Canada (N = 1,087)—a multiparty system with a fluid ideological landscape—we find that voters’ ideological self-placement is often misaligned with their policy positions, especially among right-leaning individuals. However, voters still use ideological proximity to infer candidates’ policy stances in the absence of policy information, supporting the Minimal Theory. These findings contribute to theories of political decision-making beyond the United States and have implications for substantive representation in systems with centrist or ideologically flexible parties.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Public Opinion Quarterly
Published
2026-03-29
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfag015
Primary Topic
Electoral Systems and Political Participation
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Thinking Ideologically: The Limited Role of Left and Right Labels as Policy Shortcuts

Clareta Treger, Sarah Lachance
Public Opinion Quarterly
Electoral Systems and Political Participation
article

Thinking Ideologically: The Limited Role of Left and Right Labels as Policy Shortcuts

Clareta Treger, Sarah Lachance
article en

Abstract

Abstract How do voters use left-right ideological labels as shortcuts for policy positions in evaluating electoral candidates? We offer a distinction between maximal and minimal forms of ideological thinking. While maximal thinking implies that voters rely on ideological proximity as a proxy for policy congruence with candidates, minimal thinking requires only that voters use ideological labels to infer candidates’ positions—even if their own ideological identification is inconsistent with policy preferences. Drawing on original experimental data from Canada (N = 1,087)—a multiparty system with a fluid ideological landscape—we find that voters’ ideological self-placement is often misaligned with their policy positions, especially among right-leaning individuals. However, voters still use ideological proximity to infer candidates’ policy stances in the absence of policy information, supporting the Minimal Theory. These findings contribute to theories of political decision-making beyond the United States and have implications for substantive representation in systems with centrist or ideologically flexible parties.

Public Opinion Quarterly
Hebrew University of Jerusalem (IL), Oldham Council (GB)
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 6%
Electoral Systems and Political Participation
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.

Thinking Ideologically: The Limited Role of Left and Right Labels as Policy Shortcuts — Clareta Treger, Sarah Lachance · Public Opinion Quarterly (2026) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS