To what extent is the rational choice model more relevant in explaining voting behaviour than other models in the UK today? (20)

There are three different types of models which voters are seen to be part of the models are the rational choice model, the sociological model, and the party identification model. Each of these models is designed so that every voter falls into one of the categories which then helps other to identify and understand each voters voting behaviour. This essay will evaluate the usefulness of each of the rational choice, sociological and party identification models. This essay intends to argue that the rational choice model is the most relevant model when explaining voting behaviours.

The rational choice model of voting behaviour identifies those who vote based on their own rational self-interest by voting for the party which they believe will best benefit them. One of the key aspects that those who vote withing the rational choice model is the economic dependence of the government and how they have handled peoples or businesses money. For example during the 2015 general election it can be argued that the conservatives were more appealing to the rational choice model as they were seen to have handled public finances much better than the Labour party had in 2015. This means that the rational choice model is effective in explain voter behaviour as it is speculated that voters will votes based off of what will make them better off in the near by future and not in the long-term future. The key factor of economy is a short-term factor and therefore it changes every election therefore is the economy is doing well under a certain party it would only be rational for to vote for that party who is responsible for the economy’s current success. Although this does mean that voters are less likely to support just one party as their views on the party’s are constantly changing. However the rational choice model tends to only really be effective and prevalent in countries where the electorate have higher levels of education and more education meaning that this cannot account for all voters and their behaviours across the globe as it isn’t based off of gender, age, ethnicity, or party identification instead the sole benefit their vote would bring just them and their family. Overall the rational choice model is effective in explain voter behaviour to a certain extent as the rational choice model of voting behaviour assumes that people are motivated by money and by the possibility of making profit. This has allowed it to construct formal, and often predictive models of human behaviour.

Another model is the sociological model which voters vote upon due a psychological attachment they have to certain political parties. According to this model politics is based upon social cleavage, predominately politics is a matter of group interests. The concept of social cleavage was first established in the 1960s by key thinkers Lipset and Rokkan. Before the 1980s people were seen to vote on class, which ended up suggesting that we are able to guess which party someone has voted for based upon their class for example ABC1 were more likely to vote for conservatives and C2DE were more likely to vote for labour. However post 1980 there has been significant evidence of class de-alignment. For example, the independent reported in October of 2018 that one of the most remarkable features of GE17 was that Labour could no longer be seen as mainly working class and I fact there was hardly any class difference between both Labour and Conservative. This is significant in showing voter behaviour as previously in history class was a very important deciding factor on which party to vote for however this is no longer the case suggesting that maybe in recent years that people are not identifying with class so closely as they once did. However a survey conducted by YouGov showed that 9 million ABC1 people believed that they were working class and 5 million C2DE people believed that they were working class. This highlights how the sociological model fails to explain voter behaviour because people do not understand the IPSOS MORI classification this suggests that it is becoming increasingly difficult to comment specifically that class has a distinct part in measuring voter behaviour, making the sociological model ineffective in explain voter behaviour. Overall the sociological model of voting is effective to a certain extent when explaining voter behaviours as the model suggest that people are now more motivated by their own social, economic, or religious morals instead of by their, previously stated, class alignment. This means that they are more likely to vote for whichever MP or party best reflects these meanings.

Finally the party identification model suggests that voters are more likely to vote upon their long-term attachment to a specific and preferred party. Research has established that someone’s party identity are strong prompts in showing one’s attitudes and voting behaviours. partisans tends to show their repeated support for a particular party even if the party’s policy or candidates happen to change. These string personal ties that one may feel to a party can also have many benefits for the party as not only does it mean that they shall have their repeated support but also that they may even carry out work such as campaigning for them. Further research has also shown that many people have already made up their mind up on who they will vote for before the political parties’ campaign has even begun. This is important in helping to show how the party identification model is able to show voter behaviour as often people choose their decision upon historic family traditions or positions that their family may have had over many a years. However the partisan links are similar to the voter’s identification with social class, religion, and denomination, meaning that there is a clear overlap of both the party identification model and the sociological model in a voting term. This is because someone’s social class and family are prominent factors for the voters voting behaviour for both of the models. Overall upon evaluation I believe that the party identification model is a relevant factor in describing voter behaviour to a certain extent because psephologists have demonstrated that between the 1950s-1970s voting behaviour heavily linked in with many social factors such as age, class and gender and therefore social factor was one of the most important factors when those people were casting there votes, and often these morals we carry about social factors are inherited by our family.

In conclusion I believe that all the models are relevant in explaining voter behaviour, however I believe that the rational choice model is the most relevant.  This Is because although the rational choice model can only be fully effective on a country if that have a highly intelligent electorate, the model is extremely effective as it. The sociological model is also effective to a certain extent as it is able to create distinct links between things such as age and votes as for example, during the Brexit vote almost all social classes of 18–34-year-olds voted to stay. However on balance the sociological model is less effective because certain aspects that effect the model, for many have become unclear meaning that the model is unable to identify is the reason they believe the voter has voted may not be correct and instead it may be because they have been confused by these certain aspects. Finally the party identification model was once highly effective because there was a very clear and direct link between individuals and a party due to how their family has voted or how loyal their support is, however, this is becoming increasingly ineffective as more and more people are moving away from voting how their family votes and instead begin to vote for who would best benefit them, therefore making them part of the rational choice model.