Pocketbook Vs. Sociotropic Corruption Voting
Abstract: We theorize and examine the channels by which corruption may affect voting behavior. First, motivated by low empirical correlation between exposure to corruption and perceptions thereof, we postulate two distinct channels: pocketbook corruption voting, defined as the effect of personal experiences with corruption on voting behavior; and sociotropic corruption voting, defined as the effect of perceptions of corruption in one's society on voting behavior. Second, we argue that the weight the voters place on each channel depends on the salience of each source of corruption. Since importance of bribe victimization to those victimized is inherently high and overall levels of bribe-taking in society are slow-changing, pocketbook corruption voting is expected to be persistent. Conversely, salience of societal corruption depends on the actions of elites, such as corruption scandals, campaigns, or entry of a new anti-corruption party, and so sociotropic voting is expected to be variable. Using data from Slovakia, we find support for our theoretical arguments. In the absence of events that raise salience of sociotropic corruption, we only find pocketbook voting. Sociotropic voting is not activated by scandals alone but it is by the entry of a credible anti-corruption party, which brings about a shift in the media coverage of corruption. Our results suggest that previous studies may have underestimated the effect of corruption on voting by missing pocketbook effects.
