PREDICTORS OF THE VOTING PREFERENCE AMONG STUDENT

ELECTORATES

Chapter 1

THE PROBLEM AND ITS SCOPE

Introduction

There is no popular study on the voting preference of University student leaders despite

the higher chance that they will actively participate in elections and the undeniable impact of

voters’ voting preferences on every aspect of human life. Whoever gets elected in office

influences every aspect of individual and social life. The elected candidates define governance

which includes making of policies and laws, implementing legislations, and arriving at a

decision that would have effect on society. Hence, there is a need to find out the factors that

influence voter’s preference to ensure that politics and governance become a vehicle for the

“common good” of the people, a means for settling issues, and a tool for ensuring social welfare

and integrity (Kurtbas, 2015). Voting preference is choosing for whom to vote (Bratton, 2013)

and election is the means by which citizens choose their representatives who would shape and

make policies and decisions governing the people (Oliveros, 2013).

However, during elections, voters choose candidates on different reasons, thus, there is

a need on looking at the bases of how voters exercised their right to suffrage, the basis on how

they vote, and especially on the reasons on the voting choices (Santiago (2012). For instance,

voters who are not intelligent choose candidates who do not know how to serve the people nut

most preferred by the common people(Santiago, 2006). Others vote because they are swayed

by the platform (Carino, Cruz and Navarele, 2016). Voters also select candidates because of
their qualities, personalities, and physical traits (Anderson, 2007). Factors like sex, socio-

economic status, religion and ethnicity also influence voting preference (IPER, 1995 and

2003). Another factor that may influence voting preference is the benefit that voters may gain

from the candidates (Muricia & Guereero, 2016).

This study will try to find out the factors that influence the voting preference of Liceo

de Cagayan University student leaders.

As political science students, an understanding of the factors that influence voting

preference will add up to the knowledge on political dynamics gained in the classroom. It

would also become a tool for discussion and basis for future political participation.
Theoretical Framework

The study will be anchored on the idea that voting preference of voters is influenced

by sociological and political factors. Hence, the theory by Kurbas, I. (2015) on the sociological

and political factors that influence voting preference and Murcia and Bolo (2017) Millennial

voters voting preference will be used in the study. Equally important in understanding voters

preference are Andrew Down’s Rational Choice Theory (1957) and Lazarfeld and Thielins’

Social Identity Theory (1958).

Kurtbas, I. (2015) in “The Factors influencing voting preferences in local elections: an

empirical study” (International Journal of Humanities and Social Science Vo. 5, No. 9 (1) believes

that there are sociological and political factor that affect the political choices of voters. These

factors include sociologic, rational and the theory of psychologic identification with the political

party. According to Kurtbas (2015) when making a choice, the voter can benefit from sociologic

factors such as collective and social links; due to emotional links developed since childhood, the voter

can identify himself/herself with a political party; or make a choice by rationally examining the subject

matter and provided services in line with his/her own interests. From a socio demographic perspective,

people who are young, who have higher education and income levels and who are first time voters

attach a greater importance to the general elections. On the other hand, for people who are older, who

have voted more than once before and whose education and income levels are low, local elections are

more important. For about one out of every ten voters, his/her vote means nothing to him/her, to his/her

country or to democracy. As the level of education and income increases though, the number of people

who value their vote decreases and as the level of education and income decreases, the number of

people who say they have no idea about whether their vote is important increases. A significant portion

of voters, conducts little or no research before elections. When compared by gender, it is observed that
man, those who value their vote and those who had voted more than at least once before, research about

elections more than the women, those who do not value their vote and those who are first time voters.

However, with increased age, education and income levels, the desire to research candidates/parties

before elections increases as well. The largest portion of the voters, consider ideology of the candidate

as the most influential factor on their preferences in local elections. In addition to this, for voters the

most important factors are, respectively: candidate’s former actions; his/her image; their psychological

attachment to the candidate’s party; candidate’s good knowledge of local problems; candidate’s party’s

projects and cadres; and candidate’s party’s being in power. Men care more about the political ideology

and the image of the candidate whereas women attach greater importance to the candidate’s former

activities; his/her knowledge of local problems; his/her party’s being in power; their psychological

attachment to the candidate’s party and; that party’s cadres and projects. As the level of income

increases, percentage of those who say the most influential factor on their political choices is party

cadres and projects and the candidate’ knowledge of local problems increases while the percentage of

those who say their long standing support to the political party matters the most decreases. In terms of

participants’ occupation, for those who work in private sector, party’s cadres and projects; for public

servants, the candidate’s former activities; for the unemployed the candidate’s political ideology and

for the retired, the candidate’s image, his/her good knowledge of local problems and their psychological

attachment to the candidate’s party was the most important factors influencing their political choices.

In terms of education, as the level of education increased the percentage of those who care about the

candidate’s former activities increased whereas the percentage of those who care whether the

candidate’s party is in power and the percentage of those who tend to always vote for the same party

decreased. A very large portion of the voters, as high as 69.2%, said they would still vote for their

candidate/party although they had no chance of winning while 25.2% said they would not support a

party and/or candidate that has no chance of winning. The fact that a single factor influences the

decisions and preferences of one out of every four voters, relatively, demonstrates the importance of

Bandwagon effect. Socio demograhically, women, young people and people with lower income levels
have a greater tendency to vote for their candidate even though s/he does not have a chance of winning

(Bandwagon effect is less). On the other hand, men, older people and people with lower education

levels have a greater tendency to support the winning party (Bandwagon effect is more).

Specifically, Kurtbas(2015) identified the following factors as influences on voting preference,

namely; Political factors: (1) rate of voting experience, (2) Voters Commitment to election, (3) Voters’

tendency to vote for non-winning candidates, (4) voters’ political interests and awareness, and (4)

importance of voting in election, (6) Voters belief of the winning of the candidate.

Kurtbas ( 2015) also considered the following as “the most important factors” influencing

voters’ political choices, namely; (1) image of the candidate, (2) political ideology of the candidate, (3)

former actions of the candidate, (4) Political party affiliation or attachment, (5) Party cadres and

projects, (6) Fact that the Party is in power , (7) Party/ candidates knowledge of local problems.

Murcia and Bolo (2017) believes that voters today consider as the most important factor

in choosing the candidates are those from whom they will benefit most. Other factors include

(1) shifting content of campaign advertising – and the policy content of ads, (2) party

identification, (3) use social media for their own goals, (4) Popularity of candidate to whom in

which they can benefit the most, i.e. using their family names as important components of their

campaigns, (5) the unique set of characteristics and propositions each election candidate has

to bring to the table such as candidates’ qualities and candidates’ personalities and physical

traits, (6) and candidates four (4) most preferable attributes namely: profession or occupation,

political experience, personality, platform of governance, and educational level.

Carl Lande (1965) believes that voters’ preferences are influence by patrol-client relations.

In this framework, political leaders who are of a higher socio-economic status (patron) acquire

power by providing material benefits to people of lower status (client), who in turn, commit their

votes to the patron during elections. At election time, it is expected that repayment by the “little

people” will be made by voting and campaigning for the benefactor, should he choose to run
for public office, or for whatever candidates he designates. Thus little people often find

themselves in the position of dependents and followers, while "big people" often have

leadership thrust upon them.

Andrew Down’s Rational Choice Theory. Down (1957) defined Rational Choice as the

view that people behave as they do because they believe that performing their chosen actions

has more benefits than costs. People make rational choices base on their own best interest.

Voting is seen as a rational act, in the sense that individual electors are believed to decide their

candidates on the preference on the basis of personal interest. Himmelveit, Humphreys and

Jaeger (1985), portray voters as active in the sense that they behave like consumers expressing

a choice amongst the available policy options. Downs (1957) implied that in Rational Choice

Theory, every individual has a rational side which made them capable in making choices.

Kahneman (2011) quoted “Rationality is logical coherence—reasonable or not” (Kahneman

2011:411), pointed that to be rational is to behave consistently, regardless of whether the

choice taken stems from instinct or thought out reason—what he calls system 1 and system 2.

Esther (2007) stated that inherent in rational choice behaviour is maximizing utility,

before an individual makes a choice they consider the benefit they will choose the preference

that yields the highest utility, relative to the cost and benefit. Furthermore, Feddersen and

Sandroni (2000) added the concept of duty to explain utility gained intrinsically from voting.

Blais (2000) writes “For many people voting is not only a right, it is also a duty.”

Rational Choice Theory according to McGann (22016) starts as a basic assumptions

about rational action and then deduces the behaviour of actors using mathematical methods.

Currently, in the field of political science, the theory became a subfield because of its

usefulness in the study of voting choice of an individual. To assume that people are rational,
Weber (1978) argues that to do interpretive social science it is necessary to adopt a stance of

methodological—rationalism.

The study will use also Lazarfeld and Thielins’ Social Identity Theory. Lazarsfeld and

Thielins, Jr. (1958) Social group theory consists of a view extrapolating the socio-economic,

religious and other identifications, which are provided by relating vote intentions to social

characteristics of each individual, as the variables explaining the voter’s choices. According to

this theory, the individual learns the partisan predisposition conformable to the political

traditions of membership or reference groups.

The Social Choice Theory. According to Madison (1787) social choice is a theory of

direct or pure democracy which seeks to understand the connection between individual

preferences, institutional rules and outcomes. Social Choice Theory is a mathematical theory

that deals with aggregation of individual preferences. The theory was developed by economist

Kenneth Arrow in the 20th century. Arrow’s paradigm, the concept of choice is constructed

from “preference”. Social choice is a formal extension of the construction of choice based on

preferences (Rogers, 1975).

Schematic Presentation

INDEPENDENT VARIABLES DEPENDENT VARIABLES

Voting Preference in terms of:

A. Demographic A. Attributes of Candidates
Profile 1. Political Party
1. Gender Identification
2. Popularity
2. Age
3. Characteristics/
3. Course Personality of the candidate
Statement of the Problem

The study intends to determine the voting preference and the factors influencing

voting preference of student leaders in Liceo de Cagayan University.

Specifically, the study will answer the following questions:

1. What is the demographic profile of the participants in terms of the following:

1.1. Gender

1.2. Course

1.3. Year Level

1.4. Religion

1.5. Ethnicity

1.6. Party Affiliation

2. What is the voting preference of the participants in terms of the political factors of the

candidates?

2.1. Political Party Identification

2.2.Popularity

2.3.Characteristics/Personality of the candidate

2.4.Educational Level

2.5.Profession/occupation

2.6.Political Experience

2.7.Platform of Governance

3. Is there a significant relationship between the voting preference of the participants and the

demographic factors?

4. Which of the independent variables influence the voting preference?

Hypothesis:

H0: There is no significant difference in the voting preference of the respondents when

grouped according to demographic profile

Scope and Delimitations of the Study

The study on the voting preference will be limited only to the student electorates

ranging from eighteen years old and above and who are qualified to vote. Moreover, the study

will focus on the voting preference of the student leaders in Liceo de Cagayan University from

A. Y. 2019-2020 and determines the factors that affect the respondents’ voting preferences.

Significance of the Study

This study will serve as a tool that would give benefits to the following:

Students. The findings of this study would help future researchers who will be

conducting further study about voting preference. The researcher may be able to use this as

their reference.

Political Science. The data of this study is believed to contribute to the literature of

political science and other relevant areas.

Politicians. The findings of this study would be able to help the politicians in predicting

the results of any elections. It will give interested parties an opportunity to better understand

the student voters preference with respect to the local elections.

Government. Being aware of the youths voting preference will help for the statistics

purposes such as polls, in order to be aired in public the preferred candidates among the youths.

It also helps determine and separate the nuisance candidates to the competent candidates.
Definition of Terms

The following are the most common terms used throughout the study. These words will

enable the readers to understand fully the voting preference among student electorates in

relation to demographics.

Demographic. This term refers to the factors to be used in the study to determine

whether it affects the voting preference of the respondents.

Voting Preference. Voting preference is different from voting behaviour. The term

voting preference is choosing whom to vote.

Student Electorate. They are the respondents of the study from ages eighteen years

old and above.

Gender. This refers to the state of being male or female.

Socioeconomic Status. Socioeconomic status is the social standing or class of an

individual or group. It is often measured as a combination, income and occupation.

Religious Affiliation. Religious affiliation is the self-identified association of a person

with a religion, denomination or sub-denominational religious group.

Ethnicity. Refers to the state of belonging to a social group that has a common national

or cultural tradition. Ethnicity is usually an inherited status based on the society in which one

lives.

Geographic Origin. Refers to the location where a person have been born and raise.

Vote Buying. Refers to the amount of money given by a candidate during election to

secure a vote.

Political Party Affiliation. Refers to the Political Party a voter is registered and

supporting.
 Chapter 2 HIDE “PAGE” WORD & NUMBER

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE AND STUDIES

This chapter presents the related literature after the thorough search done by the
researchers.

Suffrage as the most basic privilege of a citizen stated that in a democratic

country, government officials are usually ordained through ballot; citizens who are in qualified

to vote have the right to participate to elect their representatives during the election. Voting is

a means of executing ones individual power to vote for their preferred candidate and the

candidates will be elected by a majority vote or into collective decision in an election (Oriya

vote, 2000).

There a various ways of studying the voting preferences of an individual. One is to

study the factors affecting their choices such as party identification, popularity of the candidate,

personality, educational attainment, profession, political experience, platform of governance

and vote buying.

Party identification is a long-term, affective attachment to a voters’ preferred political

party. Researchers found out that these party identities are one factor that guides the voting

preference of an individual. It is shown that voters tends to support their preferred party

repeatedly, even if there are changes in the candidates and issues in the party (Dalton, Russel,

2016). Voters often give their votes to long-established family traditions or to the choices they
had during the past elections. Social identity theory argued that these partisan ties are similar

to identifications with a social class, religious denomination, or other social group.

In establishing the party identification of an individual, the parents play a central role.

The parents transmit their partisanship to their children because the party loyalties reflect the

values of the family unit and are formed when parents are the dominant influence in a child’s

life. Jennings, Kent, Stoker, Laura & Bowers, Jake (2009) pointed out that Young adults are

highly influenced by the party their parents, friends and co-workers support. Holmberg (2008)

supported this claim that party identification, traditionally has been seen as a result of the

family influence on social identity or professional belonging.

Millions of Filipinos are actively using social media nowadays. Politicians emerged

from the traditional way of campaigning and have seen the need to keep up with the social

media generation. The ability to reach a huge number of population became attractive to the

political candidates and used social media for their own goals (Dangla, 2016). Millennials or

young people from ages 35 and below, most-likely to prefer a candidate on the basis of their

popularity.

Young voters, instead of voting from traditional politicians they choose TV actors and

personalities with no experience or sufficient education (David & Atun, 2015). The lack of

education toward the right voting decisions leads people to select a candidate who are famous

in social media, actors and a candidate with well-known family names. Christensen, Dag Arne

and Midtbo, Tor (2007) studied that the candidates support has relied almost entirely on the

candidates’ characteristics in order to determine their popularity.

Voters frequently differentiate candidates in terms of their personal qualities –traits

are deemed important. In the study of Kenski, Kate, Hardy, Bruce, & Jamieson, Kathleen
(2014) casual political conversation among the citizens often tackles about the candidates’

personalities. When asked to explain why they support such candidates, personal attributes

are often used as a reason.

There is a wide difference in voting preferences between people with more and less

educational attainment. Among the demographic characteristics, education has received most

attention in some research papers. Education gives an individual the ability to understand

issues and monitor elected politicians. It also increases the individuals’ ability to choose a

better politician and contribute to improve the working of the political system (Benedetto &

Paola, 2014). Education is seen as a means to assist citizens with information more

effectively, and to guide them with their preferences more coherently.

Milligan, Moretti, and Oreopoulos (2014) found that in the United States and United

Kingdom the level of education attained by a citizen is related to several measures of

political involvement. Education has been identified as one of the most significant factors

explaining the probability of voting (Snyder, 2011).

A theory of Philippine politics emerged that until now remains the most influential

among academics and is widely adopted by journalists, diplomats and other observers of the

politics in Philippines. Its argument tells that Philippine politics cycles around interpersonal

relationships –especially familial and patron-client, factional framework (PCF). It deserves to

be influential; after all, patron-client and other personal relations are indeed significant in

Philippine political life. These are also important features in many other countries; hence, the

pcf framework developed for Philippine studies has contributed as well to comparative political

studies.
 A serious problem with the framework is that it leaves out and obscures a great deal

about Philippine politics. Moreover, the framework is so routinely used by scholars and other

observers that it has become reified to the point that it itself has almost become Philippine

politics, rather than being a useful perspective or interpretation for making sense of aspects of

political life. The interpretations of Philippine politics, which the theory refer to as

dependency, a democratic country dominated by the elite, bring in features of the country’s

political way of life that’s what pcf is. Yet they too omit much that is vital, and they share with

the framework an emphasis on personal and patron-client relations.

The central objection is that the pcf framework minimizes, even dismisses values and

ideas, bases for organization and cooperation, and cleavages and frictions except those of a

personal, familial, patron-client nature. Because other values, ideas, organizations, and

conflicts are marginalized and deemed unimportant, Philippine politics and its society and

culture generally are portrayed in an overly simplistic, not conceptualized manner. And

Filipinos for whom other dimensions do in fact matter are similarly reduced to mere caricatures

of their fuller, more complicated selves. The main point is that the dominant PCF framework

is inadequate, as are the available alternative. After elaborating what PCF is and what

alternatives add, this study will look at elections where PCF is supposed to be most applicable

at a few other realms in the political landscape: politicians, political movements, and everyday

politics.

Religion was also viewed as an influencing factor in the voter’s decision. Using

multinomial logic aggression analysis, a study indicated that religion affliliation and the degree
of an individual’s behavior and beliefs were key predictors of vote choice in a presidential

election.

In 2016, a study made by Macapagal using a three-way ANOVA, revealed that the

respondents perceived political candidates positively. Respondents from lower social classes

and female showed more favorable perceptions over female politicians. The respondents

believed that female politicians were more attractive, emotional, intelligent and religious while

the male politicians were more corrupt. There were several findings as well that females tended

to view female politicians more positively.

The Institute for Political and Electoral Reform (IPER) on one hand used Factor

Analysis to identify factor groups that determine the voting behavior of the Filipino electorate.

The following are: the benefit factor (characteristics that can be of benefit to the voter), political

machinery, popularity and endorsement of traditional networks.

A month before the 2014 election in Taipei, survey participants were asked about their

party identification, explicit political party preference, ethnic identity and voting intention.

With the use of hierarchical regression analysis, results showed that the impact of implicit

preferences on voting appeared to be present across different cultures; that voters evaluate

candidates from their ethnic group more favorably than those of other ethnic groups.

Half of the world’s population is dominated by women, however, they continue t lag

behind in positions of decision-making and political affairs in every country (“Women in

National Parliaments,” 2005). In the Philippines, power and decision-making continue to be

dominated by the male. Based on the Commission on Elections (COMELEC) data, the average

participation rate of women in the House of Representative and local government is hardly

10%. The reason of imbalanced of power is that the poor representation of women in leadership
roles traditionally focused on the idea that there is a lack of qualified women or that women

display fewer traits and motivations necessary to attain and achieve success in political office.

Male and female in the past researchers shows that both differ in political information and

interest. In the western studies, results showed that males consistently know more about

politics while the females on the other hand express less interest in the field of politics. Aside

from political interest and information, men and women differ in political participation as well

in terms of voting and running for public office (Appleton & Mazur, 1993; Bennett & Bennet,

1993; Phar, 1981; Tangcangco, 1992).

As a result to the previous research, it was clearly shown that women continue to be

less interested and involved compared to men. This process of socialization continues to

encourage political passivity among women and promotes the idea that politics is more suitable

for males.

The SWS survey in the 2004 election showed that Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo had a

commanding lead in classes ABC than Fernando Poe Jr. but FPJ failed to pull away in classed

D and E (Olivares-Cunanan, 2004).

Chapter 3 HIDE “PAGE” WORD & NUMBER

METHODOLOGY
 This chapter discusses the specific procedures employed by the researchers in gathering

the data for the study.

Research Setting

The researchers will conduct the study at Liceo de Cagayan University located in RN

Pelaez Blvd., Carmen, Cagayan de Oro City, 9000 Misamis Oriental, Philippines. Liceo de

Cagayan has a number of 13 colleges and a School of Graduate Studies.

Research Design

The study is a quantitative research utilizing the descriptive-correlational research

design through survey research method which will employ the use of researcher-made survey

questionnaire. It describes the participants’ socio-demographic profile and their preferred

characteristics of electoral choices.

Descriptive study is “concerned not only with the characteristics of individuals but with

the characteristics of the whole sample thereof. It provides information useful to the solutions

of local issues (problems)” (Salaria, 2012).

Salaria (2012) stipulated that the survey research employs applications of scientific

method by critically analyzing and examining the source materials, by analyzing and

interpreting data, and by arriving at generalization and prediction. Since, the present study was

undertaken to study the voting preferences of the respondents, hence, the descriptive survey

research method was adopted.

Participants and Sampling Procedure

The target population for this study are the students from ages eighteen years old and

above and who are qualified to vote in Liceo de Cagayan University.

In this study, the accessible population comprises all college students who are qualified

to vote. Since most of them are registered voters. Therefore, they are in the best position to fit

with the information the researchers needed to answer the questions of the study.

In the selection of participants, the researchers will use as participants of the study all

the student leaders in the A.Y. 2019-2020, hence, there is no need of sampling. The respondents

will be accessed according to availability, accessibility and of consent.

Research Instruments

The study will use a researcher made survey questionnaire which will comprise of two

parts, namely; part I will collect data on the socio-demographic profile of the respondents and

part II, will be used to collect information on the voting preference of the student leaders.

Survey Questionnaire

General description:
This survey questionnaire will collect information on the voting preference of the student

leaders of Liceo de Cagayan University. It will also determine the socio-demographic factors

that influence their voting choices.

Instruction”

Please supply completely with information the following:

1.0 Socio-demographic Information

1.1 Name (optional)_________________________________ Student Leader YES NO

(If ‘YES’ indicate position)____________________________

1.2 Gender: __________

1.3 Course: __________________

1.4 Year Level: _______________

1.5 Age:_______________________

1.6 Religion: _________________________________

1.7 Ethnic background: _________________________

1.8 Political Party membership: ___________________ or None

1.9 Religious Affiliation: ______________________________________

2.0 Candidates Attributes: HIDE “PAGE” WORD & NUMBER

To what extent do you vote for candidates based on the following?

Legend Score Procedure:
1.0 – 1.49 (Not Preferred)
1.49 – 2.49 (Less Preferred)
2.49 – 3.49 (Moderately Preferred)
3.49 – 4.49 (Preferred)
4.49 – 5.00 (Most Preferred)

5 4 3 2 1
Agree Undecided Disagree Strongly
Strongly
Disagree
Agree
I Prefer a candidate with a
professional background
I prefer a candidate with
Government/Political
Experience in Service
I prefer a candidate who has
a desirable personality
I prefer a candidate with
well-
structured/convincing/tested
platform
I prefer a candidate with no
educational attainment
I prefer a candidate with
elementary educational
attainment
I prefer a candidate with
high school educational
attainment
I prefer a candidate with
college educational level
I prefer a candidate who is a
college degree holder
I prefer a candidate with the
same geographical origin as
me
I prefer a candidate whose
political campaign activities
are clean
I prefer a candidate whose
political campaign are
beneficial
 I prefer a candidate whose
political party I am inclined
with
I prefer a candidate with
good media image
I prefer a candidate with a
desirable physical traits

I prefer a candidate with the

same religion I am affiliated
with
I prefer a candidate who
gives money in exchange
for my vote

References
Kenski, K., B. W. Hardy, and K. H. Jamieson. 2014. Candidate Traits and Political Choice.
New York: Oxford University Press.

Marco Alberto De Benedetto., and Maria De Paola., 2014. Candidates’ Quality and
Electoral Participation: Evidence from Italian Municipal Elections. Germany:

Milligan, K., E. Moretti, and P. Oreopoulos (2004): “Does education improve

citizenship? Evidence from the United States and the United Kingdom,” Journal
of Public Economics, 88(9), 1667–1695.