The Conditionally Competent Voter: When Instrumental versus Expressive Motivations Influence Political Decision-Making

The ability of voters to elect politicians into office who can bring about desired or positive outcomes, i.e., voter competence, is subject to continual debate in political science. One camp argues that voters are largely ignorant of policy outcomes, showcasing when constituents are driven by their identity rooted in affective attachments to social groups. This contrasts the substance-based view, which presents evidence that policy issues and other objective outcomes drive voter behavior. I argue that both sources of motivation can drive behavior, but show how context determines which source increases in influence on decision-making. In contexts where there is greater attribution of substantive outcomes to incumbent actions, this component is weighed more heavily. In contexts where policy outcomes are “noisier,” the identity component attains more weight in decision-making. I design a novel randomized controlled experiment and find evidence for the argument.