This empirical study of ballot rolloff in intermediate appellate court elections suggests that the variables that affect rolloff are in many ways similar at the lower-court and state supreme court levels.
This empirical study analyzes all intermediate appellate court elections involving incumbents from 2000–2007, using data to estimate models of challenger entry and incumbent success once challenged and discussing similarities and differences between these findings and the results of studies of higher-visibility elections.
This empirical study analyzes data from a 1982 California poll survey on state supreme court confirmation elections and concludes that voters use partisan information to structure their voting decisions during nonpartisan judicial elections.
This empirical study examines a series of post-election surveys of voters in fourteen contests for the Ohio Supreme Court over twenty years, concluding that in a state in which candidates’ party affiliations are not disclosed on the ballot, high-visibility contests for judgeships produce more partisan voting than do lower-visibility contests, suggesting that high-visibility elections result in greater voter awareness of basic candidate information and that this information informs voting decisions.
This empirical study of partisan judicial elections in Texas in 1976 finds that the electorate lacks the information necessary to make an elective judicial selection system function properly, and concludes that for judicial elections to fulfill their democratic purpose, organizations should assume a more active role in informing the public about judicial candidates.
This empirical study of voters in Spokane County, Washington, concludes that voters in nonpartisan judicial elections are more well-informed and more interested in public affairs than those who do not vote in judicial elections.
This empirical study of nonpartisan judicial elections taking place in Washington and Oregon in 1980 examines voter turnout, knowledge, attitudes on judicial independence, and other factors, concluding that States should do more to increase voter knowledge and that highly informed voters are more supportive of judicial independence than are less informed voters
This article examines the effect of ballot information on voter decisions on whether and how to vote in particular contests and presents the results of experimental manipulations that show that candidates’ party affiliations, but not incumbency status or city of residence, have a substantial effect on those decisions.
This empirical study of ballot roll-off in 654 supreme court elections from 1980–2000 shows that competition, incumbency, and contextual forces that increase salience and information have an important impact on voter participation.