Study on choice blindness finds voters more malleable than thought (w/ video)

April 11, 2013 by Bob Yirka report
A step-by-step demonstration of the manipulation procedure. Credit: PLoS ONE 8(4): e60554. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0060554

( —Cognitive scientists at Lund University in Sweden have found that prospective voters in political elections are perhaps more open to opposing views than political pundits have claimed. The team describes in their paper published in PLOS ONE, how they rigged questionnaires filled out by random prospective voters to slant away from their stated political views and found that in many cases those that filled out the questionnaire were willing to agree with the forged results.

It's become a matter of fact in —most people have made up their minds about issues and candidates long before election-day, thus, it behooves those trying to sway voters to concentrate mainly on those still on the fence. But is it true? The team from Lund came up with a way to test the theory—they created and then went out into the streets to enlist to take them. But they had a trick up their sleeve, the questionnaire-giving process was rigged.

Using Choice Blindness to Shift Political Attitudes and Voter Intentions

In all 163 people of various ages consented when approached by researchers—each was asked to fill out a questionnaire (if they indicated first that they intended to vote in an upcoming election). Prior to filling it out, each volunteer was asked about their —then as each filled out the questionnaire form, the researcher, who was watching what they marked, filled out an identical form with different answers—specifically to slant in opposition to the what the volunteer marked. As the volunteer finished his or her survey, the researcher hid the rigged form beneath a notebook and then (unbeknownst to the volunteer) very neatly glued it in place over the top of the volunteer's original. The researcher then asked the volunteer to review and discuss the answers given as both viewed the questionnaire results. Surprisingly, only 22 percent of the volunteers noticed that their answers had been altered. Even more surprising was that fully 92 percent of the volunteers accepted the altered form as the one they'd filled out and actually endorsed what they'd appeared to have written. When asked to fill out a voter intention form afterwards, 48 percent of the volunteers agreed with the altered results, indicating they'd changed their minds about which way they were going to vote.

Change in voting intention in the control and in the manipulated condition. Credit: doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0060554.g002

This little experiment doesn't prove that voters can be easily swayed of course—the volunteers might have changed their minds back to their original position before the election, or been hesitant in confronting the researchers about what they'd thought they'd written. But it does suggest that more study needs to be done regarding voter allegiance and whether the current strategy of focusing on so-called undecided , is actually the best course of action for politicos.

Explore further: Implicit political attitudes can predict future voting behavior

More information: Hall L, Strandberg T, Pärnamets P, Lind A, Tärning B, et al. (2013) How the Polls Can Be Both Spot On and Dead Wrong: Using Choice Blindness to Shift Political Attitudes and Voter Intentions. PLoS ONE 8(4): e60554. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0060554

Political candidates often believe they must focus their campaign efforts on a small number of swing voters open for ideological change. Based on the wisdom of opinion polls, this might seem like a good idea. But do most voters really hold their political attitudes so firmly that they are unreceptive to persuasion? We tested this premise during the most recent general election in Sweden, in which a left- and a right-wing coalition were locked in a close race. We asked our participants to state their voter intention, and presented them with a political survey of wedge issues between the two coalitions. Using a sleight-of-hand we then altered their replies to place them in the opposite political camp, and invited them to reason about their attitudes on the manipulated issues. Finally, we summarized their survey score, and asked for their voter intention again. The results showed that no more than 22% of the manipulated replies were detected, and that a full 92% of the participants accepted and endorsed our altered political survey score. Furthermore, the final voter intention question indicated that as many as 48% (±9.2%) were willing to consider a left-right coalition shift. This can be contrasted with the established polls tracking the Swedish election, which registered maximally 10% voters open for a swing. Our results indicate that political attitudes and partisan divisions can be far more flexible than what is assumed by the polls, and that people can reason about the factual issues of the campaign with considerable openness to change.

Press release

Related Stories

Recommended for you

Ancient DNA offers new view on saber-toothed cats' past

October 19, 2017

Researchers who've analyzed the complete mitochondrial genomes from ancient samples representing two species of saber-toothed cats have a new take on the animals' history over the last 50,000 years. The data suggest that ...

Six degrees of separation: Why it is a small world after all

October 19, 2017

It's a small world after all - and now science has explained why. A study conducted by the University of Leicester and KU Leuven, Belgium, examined how small worlds emerge spontaneously in all kinds of networks, including ...

Scientists see order in complex patterns of river deltas

October 19, 2017

River deltas, with their intricate networks of waterways, coastal barrier islands, wetlands and estuaries, often appear to have been formed by random processes, but scientists at the University of California, Irvine and other ...


Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

1.8 / 5 (5) Apr 11, 2013
This study only demonstrates compensatory behavior.

It does not show malleability of voter opinions.

Confused people will seek to defend what they have said because they do not want to appear confused.

By changing the answers, the respondent, confused by what he has been convinced are his responses, compensates by supporting his responses.
not rated yet Apr 11, 2013
Not new knowledge, but important because it is not widely known, and it is not widely accepted either.

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.