close× Call Us
Title Clientelist Candidates and Voting Behavior in Brazil
Post date 10/05/2018
C1 Background and Explanation of Rationale The objective of the study is to investigate how voters process, react to, and act on information about political candidates engaging in clientelist or other types of particularist behavior. How does hearing about a candidate's use of particularist appeals affect voters' likelihood of voting for the candidate? How do the details of a clientelist exchanges affect how people view the exchange's moral or legal acceptability?
C2 What are the hypotheses to be tested?

H1: Voters have an aversion toward quid-pro-quo particularist benefits (clientelism).

H2: Voters have a preference for public goods over private ones.

H3: Voters are more supportive of candidates when they live near the candidate's base of support. Voters who live near a candidate’s electoral base will also be more supportive of their particularist behavior.

Experiment 2:

Voters judge potentially clientelist exchanges as more unethical and illegal if …
- H1: the politician requires a quid-pro-quo exchange from the potential recipient.
- H2: the politician offers the benefit directly to an individual voter rather than to a community leader.
- H3: the recipient changes their vote as a result of the benefit.
- H4: the recipient is wealthy.
- H5: the politician offers cash or material goods rather than services or a job.

C3 How will these hypotheses be tested? * The research will involve a survey with 2000 Brazilian voters that includes two conjoint experiments. In the first, respondents will be shown profiles of two hypothetical political candidates and asked to say which one they would be more likely to vote for. I will randomly vary the candidates’ particularist behavior to test the main hypotheses. In the second conjoint, respondents will read a vignette of a situation that “occasionally occurs” during elections in Brazil. The vignettes will describe a politician offering some benefit to a voter or group of voters, with different details of the exchange randomly varied. Respondents will be asked to rate the ethicality and legality of the politician’s behavior and asked to say what the voter should do in response to the offer.
C4 Country Brazil
C5 Scale (# of Units) 2000
C6 Was a power analysis conducted prior to data collection? Yes
C7 Has this research received Insitutional Review Board (IRB) or ethics committee approval? Yes
C8 IRB Number 19008
C9 Date of IRB Approval 8/29/2018
C10 Will the intervention be implemented by the researcher or a third party? survey company Offerwise
C11 Did any of the research team receive remuneration from the implementing agency for taking part in this research? No
C12 If relevant, is there an advance agreement with the implementation group that all results can be published? Yes
C13 JEL Classification(s) not provided by authors