Information distortion and voting choices: The origins and effects of factual beliefs in initiative elections

Chris Wells, Justin Reedy, John Gastil, Carolyn Lee

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

42 Scopus citations


To account for voter decision making in initiative elections, we integrate theory and research on public opinion, misinformation, and motivated reasoning. Heuristic and motivated reasoning literatures suggest that voters' preexisting values interact with political sophistication such that politically knowledgeable voters develop systematically distorted empirical beliefs relevant to the initiatives on their ballots. These beliefs, in turn, can predict voting preferences even after controlling for underlying values, regardless of one's political sophistication. These hypotheses were tested using a 2003 voter survey conducted prior to a statewide initiative election that repealed a workplace safety regulation. Results showed that only those voters knowledgeable of key endorsements had initiative-specific beliefs that lined up with their underlying antiregulation values. Also, voters' empirical beliefs had an effect on initiative support even after controlling for prior values, and political sophistication did not moderate this effect.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)953-969
Number of pages17
JournalPolitical Psychology
Issue number6
StatePublished - Dec 2009

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Social Psychology
  • Experimental and Cognitive Psychology
  • Clinical Psychology
  • Philosophy
  • Sociology and Political Science
  • Political Science and International Relations


Dive into the research topics of 'Information distortion and voting choices: The origins and effects of factual beliefs in initiative elections'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this