Team 1, Section 03

Evan Gross, Frances Nedler, Sweta Ukani

762:395 Research Methods - Fall 2015 - Prof. Hetling

Final Paper on Data Analysis  

Introduction

The most important right of an American citizen is the right to vote. It was a tough, challenging journey to reach this milestone. Every citizen in America has the legal right to vote regardless of his or her socioeconomic background, protected by the Fifteenth Amendment. This paper aims to examine and test the effects of race and education on voting. We have come up with two hypotheses for our study. Our first hypothesis is that individuals part of minority groups are less likely to vote than individuals part of the majority group, because the candidates are more often representative of the majority group rather than of the minority groups. Our second hypothesis is that as the level of one’s education (degree) increases, their likelihood of voting increases, because individuals with a higher level of education are more informed about voting through their educational experiences.

Background

In order to support our first hypothesis stated in the introduction section above, we chose two articles that help explain the correlation between race and voting. Data analysis was collected from the 2008 and 2012 elections in order to see if race or ethnicity had an effect on voting. Black counties displayed quite a low site density compared to the general population in both 2008 and 2012, which affected voting. In this article, there are graphs that support this information. There were 180 counties that were observed and of those counties, at least one out of every five residents was identified as being Black.  What was surprising was that out of these 180 counties, zero of those who identified as being Black, attended a voting site. When this was compared to having doubled the number of residents at a voting site, there were still zero Black residents who attended. This shows that even with an increase in the total amount of voters chosen, the number of Black residents remained the same. Regarding Hispanic residents, there were significantly more counties selected. When one-fifth of the population was accounted for, eight individuals with a Hispanic background out of 1,000 overall residents had attended at least one voting site in 2008 and seven in 2012. This increase, even though still low as compared to the white majority group, is higher due to the large percentage of Hispanics in rural parts of the southwest. Fullmer explains how state factors have a strong effect on the distinction among voting between the Black and Hispanic community. There is a smaller population of Blacks than those of the Hispanic community, which resulted in higher voting turnout, but still the two were quite low as related to the majority group (Fullmer 2015).

Just as Fullmer studied communities consisting of minority groups and their activity of voting, such as Blacks and Hispanics, David Weakliem carried out a similar study in the past. In his article he stated, “Race has arguably come to have a larger influence on politics in the U.S. in the last few decades” (Weakliem 1997). The focus of this article is centered around the time period of 1936-1992, giving it a historical perspective. Even in the past, voting had been affected

by socioeconomic factors. Race still has a huge impact on voting and likelihood of an individual to vocalize his or her opinion about the government. Minority groups in the United States are less likely to vocalize their opinion about politics compared to individuals identified in the majority group. Weakliem examined in his own study that showed that “class voting is lower in regions where Blacks make up a larger fraction” (1997). The study conducted by Weakliem examined different classes, different races across the United States from the mid-1930s to early 1990s . His findings, as well as Fullmer’s, support and substantiate our prediction of low voter turnout in minority groups compared to the majority group . 

In order to support our second hypothesis stated in the introduction section above, we chose two articles that help explain the correlation between education and voting. With all strains and tensions lifted off the act of voting, turnout fluctuates among the individuals with different levels of education. In Jonathan Nagler's study, he extrapolates that lower voter turnout is directed towards the least educated group, whereas the increase in voter turnout is from the group with five or more years of college education (Naglier 1991). While Nagler discusses other aspects in his study, a portion of his findings supports our hypothesis about the correlation between highest degree and voting. The survey conducted by Loretta Bass and Lynne Casper coincides with Nagler’s study. Bass and Casper had other intentions of their study but their findings strengthen and confirm our hypothesis. The activity of voting in the United States is highly impacted by an individual’s level of knowledge and degree of education (Bass & Casper 2001). The importance of replicating this study not only ensures high reliability but also less flawed findings.

Data and Methods

The full name of the dataset is the “General Social Survey.” National Opinion Research Center (NORC) at the University of Chicago collected the data and compiled the dataset. This survey was first implemented in 1972. The year in which survey we are using was conducted is 2012. The target population that was sampled of the GSS was adults (18+) living in United States households. It was restricted from 1972 to 2004 to those adults in households in the United State who could do the survey in English. In 2006 to present, it included adults living in households in the United States who can complete the survey in English or Spanish. Those unable to do the survey in either English or Spanish, along with residents of institutions and group quarters are not part of the target population. People with mental and/or physical conditions, which prevent them from completing the survey but are adults in households in the United States, are part of the target population. When interviewed again, people who moved out of the United States, died, or no longer live in a household are not included anymore in the target population. The unit of analysis is individuals. The total sample size is 1974. The sampling methodology is full random probability sampling because it involves picking locations, blocks, houses, and knocking on houses door to door. The mode used to field the survey was face-to-face interviews. We would estimate the margin of error to be between 2% and 3%. We will be weighting the data for our analysis so results are representative of the population. We want to avoid bias, and correct who we sample to who we want to sample, which is the target population.

For this dataset, we are using three variables. We have two independent variables and one dependent variable. The first independent variable is race (Black, White, or Other)  and the second independent variable is level of education (Less than high school, High school, Junior

college, Bachelor, or Graduate). The dependent variable is voting (voted, did not vote, or ineligible). When asked about the race of the respondent, about three-fourths of the respondents were identified as being white, which is part of the majority race. Only one-fourth of the respondents identified as being Black or Other, which are a part of the minority race. For the variable of race, we do not need to transform or recode in any way because the categories are mutually exclusive since each respondent can only fit into one category. It is also exhaustive because all the possible options are available. What this means is that each respondent in the survey has a category in which he or she fits into and no respondent is left without being able to choose a category. White represents our majority group, while Black and other groups represent the minority groups. When asked about the highest degree, about half of the respondents were identified with having a high school degree, as compared to almost one-fifth who had a bachelor degree. For this variable of highest degree, we do not need to recode or transform because these groups are mutually exclusive due to the reason that the individual could fit only into one category at the time of the survey. This group is exhaustive due to each category covering each level of education. When asked, “Did you vote in the 2008 election?,” approximately two-thirds voted in the election in comparison to approximately one-fourth who did not vote. For this variable, voting in the 2008 election, we do not need to recode or transform because these groups are mutually exclusive because the individual could fit only into only one category at the time of the survey. This group is exhaustive due to each category covering each voting action.

FREQUENCIES

Table 1a: RACE OF RESPONDENT

Frequency PercentValid

Percent Cumulative Percent

Valid WHITE 1477 74.8 74.8 74.8

BLACK 301 15.2 15.2 90.1

OTHER 196 9.9 9.9 100.0

Total 1974 100.0 100.0

Table 1b: HIGHEST DEGREE

Frequency PercentValid

Percent Cumulative Percent

Valid LT HIGH SCHOOL 288 14.6 14.6 14.6

HIGH SCHOOL 976 49.4 49.4 64.0

JUNIOR COLLEGE

151 7.6 7.6 71.7

BACHELOR 354 17.9 17.9 89.6

GRADUATE 205 10.4 10.4 100.0

Total 1974 100.0 100.0

Table 1c: DID RESPONDENTS VOTE IN 2008 ELECTION

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Valid Voted 1304 66.1 66.9 66.9

Did not vote 485 24.6 24.9 91.8

Ineligible 159 8.1 8.2 100.0

Total 1948 98.7 100.0Missing DON'T KNOW 22 1.1

No answer 4 .2Total 26 1.3

Total1974 100.0

When asked the race of the respondent, about three-fourths (74.8%) of participants identified as being White, while about 25% (15.2% Black and 9.9% Other) identified as being of minority groups, which consisted of Black and Other (See Table 1a). When respondents were asked of their highest degree obtained, approximately one-half (49.4%) had a high school diploma, while about one-fifth (17.9%) had a bachelor's degree (See Table 1b). When respondents were asked if they voted in the 2008 election, about two-thirds (66.1%) stated they voted, while about one-fourth (24.6%) of respondents stated they did not vote (See Table 1c).

FINDINGS: BIVARIATE ANALYSIS

We conducted a crosstab analysis in order to test our hypothesis. Table 2 shows a crosstab of the relationship between a person's race and if they voted in the 2008 election. This shows that there is a correlation between race and voting. We hypothesized that individuals part of minority groups are less likely to vote than individuals part of the majority group, because the candidates are more often representative of the majority group rather than of the minority groups. This pattern was observed in the crosstab because whites, a part of the majority group, were more likely to vote than blacks and others, a part of minority groups. Among whites, about three-fourths (72.0%) voted, as compared to one-third (33.3%) of others. The n value of blacks (1459) was a lot higher than the n value of whites and others, which were 298 and 191 in number, respectively. This indicates that the blacks surveyed could be more representative of the population because blacks had almost five times more people surveyed than whites had, and almost eight times as many surveyed as other races.

Table 2: Relationship Between Race and Voting

Race of Respondent

Did you vote in 08 election? Black White Other

Voted 68.1%

72.0% 33.3%

Did not vote 23.5%

17.0% 45.0%

Ineligible 8.4% 11.1% 21.6%

Total 100% 100% 100%

n 1459 298 191

Note: The Cramer’s V value is 0.172; p<0.001

At the 99% confidence level, we can reject the null hypothesis that there is no relationship between race of respondent and voting in the 2008 election (Chi sq., p <0.001). Additionally, we observed a weak relationship between our independent variable (race of respondent) and our dependent variable (voting in 2008 election), as measured by the Cramer’s V statistic (0.172).

Table 3 shows a crosstab of the relationship between a person's highest degree and them voting in the 2008 election. This shows that there is a correlation between race and voting. We hypothesized that as the level of one’s education (degree) increases, their likelihood of voting increases because individuals with a higher level of education are more informed about voting through their educational experiences. This pattern was observed in the crosstab because those with a bachelor's degree were more likely to vote than those with a high school diploma. Among those with a bachelor's degree, about four-fifths (82.7%) voted, as compared to three-fifths (63.4%) of those with a high school diploma. The n value of those with high school diploma (966) was approximately three times more than those with a bachelor's degree (348). This shows that out of those surveyed, there were more people who had a high school diploma than a bachelor’s degree.

Table 3: Relationship Between High Degree and Voting

Highest Degree Obtained

Did you vote in 08 election?

Less than High School

High School

Junior College

Bachelor

Graduate

Voted 29.7% 63.4% 72.6% 82.7% 84.4%

Did not vote 47.8% 25.2% 24.2% 13.9% 9.9%

Ineligible 22.5% 11.4% 3.2% 3.4% 5.7%

Total 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

n 278 966 151 348 205

Note: The Cramer’s V value is 0.255; p<0.001

At the 99% confidence level, we can reject the null hypothesis that there is no relationship between highest degree and voting in the 2008 election (Chi sq., p <0.001). Additionally, we observed a weak relationship between our independent variable (highest degree) and our dependent variable (voting in 2008 election) as measured by the Cramer’s V statistic (0.255).

DISCUSSION

As an American citizen, every individual has the right to vote and voice his or her opinion about politics and governmental issues. However, not every citizen carries out this right due to barriers such as socioeconomic factors. Voter turnout has been decreasing among certain populations leading to poor numbers of voters (De La Croix & Doepke, 2009). Socioeconomic factors have the highest influence on voting. Two determinants of voting we specifically examined are degree of education and racial background. The trend we observed between these three factors supported our hypotheses.

Our first hypothesis, individuals part of minority groups are less likely to vote than individuals part of the majority group because the candidates are more often representative of the majority group rather than of the minority groups, held because it was statistically significant with a p-value less than 0.05. Our two articles stated above in the background section, both imply that there is a relationship between the independent and dependent variable for our first hypothesis. One of the limitations to the study in the article by Weakliem was that it was a bit outdated being published in 1997 as compared to our other more recent article in 2015 by Fullmer. Even with this limitation, over fifteen years ago those of minority groups were less likely to vote than those of the majority group. Even today, as mentioned in the article by Bass and Casper, there is not a sufficient amount of Blacks and Hispanics that vote per every thousand selected in a population. There was a very minimal number who had chosen to vote of the Black and Hispanic population as for what we predicted (Bass & Casper 2001).

Our second hypothesis, as the level of one’s education (degree) increases, their likelihood of voting increases because individuals with a higher level of education are more informed about voting through their educational experiences, held as well because it was statistically significant with a p-value less than 0.05. Our two articles stated above in the background section both imply that there is a relationship between the independent and dependent variables for our second hypothesis. There is a limitation in the Naglier article because it focuses on a historical perspective because the study takes places during the years of 1936-1992 (Naglier 1991). Even with this limitation, it still provides sufficient information to support our hypothesis. Another limitation is that each individual has a different perspective on what a high education is. One may think that a high school diploma is considered a sufficient amount of education while others may think that graduate school is required for sufficient knowledge.

Based on our findings for race and voting, and degree level and voting, there is more research needed to better understand the correlation among these variables. Both our independent variables (race and highest degree) could be affected by other factors not in our study including education of parents, income level, and geographical differences. These factors could be investigated to further our research to better understand the bigger picture.

POLICY IMPLICATIONS

We have learned that although statistical tests can show a relationship between variables, you still need background information when interpreting the results. In addition, we learned that background knowledge is needed before we perform the statistical analysis, to see if our results have face validity. After testing our hypotheses and carrying out a replicated study, results were consistent with prior research of education and race affecting an individual's likelihood of voting. Although there is a relationship present between the three variables, it is fairly weak. Education plays a huge role in voter turnout. One cannot simply vote without any knowledge of the issues

in politics. Having more education and knowledge on the subject of politics gives one an upper hand in being more exposed to political ideas, and enables them to have a higher capacity in forming a political opinion. Regarding race, this specific socioeconomic background factor influences voting immensely. Minority groups are not represented as much as the majority group, especially in political elections. One practice implication regarding race could be going out to communities of blacks and other minority races and encourage the residents on the importance of voting. By targeting this demographic, we would hope to increase the percentage of these people voting, in order to make it closer in equivalence to whites’ percentage of voting. A policy implication that we recommend would be including, in the school curriculum, more exposure to the idea of voting in younger grades, which we believe would encourage people to vote once they are of age.

REFERENCES

Bass, L. E., & Casper, L. M. (2001). Impacting the Political Landscape: Who Registers and Votes Among Naturalized Americans?. Political Behavior,23(2), 103-130.

DE LA CROIX, D., & DOEPKE, M. (2009). To Segregate or to Integrate: Education Politics and Democracy. Review Of Economic Studies, 76(2), 597-628. doi:10.1111/j.1467-937X.2008.00529.x

Fullmer, E. B. (2015). The Site Gap: Racial Inequalities in Early Voting Access. American Politics Research, 43(2), 283-303. doi:10.1177/1532673X14546987

Naglier, J. (1991). THE EFFECT OF REGISTRATION LAWS AND EDUCATION ON U.S. VOTER TURNOUT. American Political Science Review, 85(4), 1393.

Weakliem, D. L. (1997). Race versus Class? Racial Composition and Class Voting, 1936-1992. Social Forces, 75(3), 939.