Skip to main content

Indirect prejudice: The danger in considering others' preferences during a primary election

Buy Article:

$14.90 plus tax (Refund Policy)

In a primary election, the normative advice is for voters to consider a candidate's electability - that is, to incorporate other voters' preferences into their own choices. We identify an ethical problem with considering electability and investigate indirect prejudice, which is the impact of other voters' prejudice on a non-prejudiced person's vote. We use an analytical model to show that indirect prejudice impacts outcomes in a primary election, where considering others' preferences is normatively superior, but not in a general election, where personal preferences dominate. When strategic voters in a primary overpredict the prejudice of general election voters, they can reject a candidate who is facing prejudice but whom the majority of voters prefer. We also present the results of an experiment that reveals that prompting respondents to think about prejudice reduces support for a female candidate, but only in a primary election. We conclude by noting the ethical dilemma tied to indirect prejudice and letting others' prejudice impact our decisions.
No Reference information available - sign in for access.
No Citation information available - sign in for access.
No Supplementary Data.
No Article Media
No Metrics

Keywords: ANALYTICAL MODEL; INDIRECT PREJUDICE; MARKETING CONCEPT; POLITICAL MARKETING; PRIMARY ELECTION

Document Type: Research Article

Publication date: 01 September 2016

More about this publication?
  • Access Key
  • Free content
  • Partial Free content
  • New content
  • Open access content
  • Partial Open access content
  • Subscribed content
  • Partial Subscribed content
  • Free trial content
Cookie Policy
X
Cookie Policy
Ingenta Connect website makes use of cookies so as to keep track of data that you have filled in. I am Happy with this Find out more