Cultural models of the Electoral Behavior

Constantin Beatrice
Anton Valeriu
Serban Oana-Roxana
Popa Ioana-Sabina

Introduction
1

In democracies, citizens are the core of any political system, and they, by vote, have the
ability to animate the entire political sphere. "Every society passes on its norms and values to its
members, who have different notions on how the political system should work, what the
government can do and how it can help them and their interests, and these beliefs, symbols and
values are the political culture of a nation.". Despite talking about a specific political culture for
each nation, there is culture manifested at an individual scale, which can be assimilated through
socializing and which finds its leaves its mark through vote. Put differently, every citizens
option to vote is influenced mainly by his own norms, values and beliefs, forged and cemented in
time, through contact with different sides of the society(family, friends, teachers, mass media,
direct contact with other groups within the same city during daily activities, etc.). The family has
a huge importance in this aspect, due to the fact that it shares its norms, value, beliefs, attitudes
as well as the fondness towards a party or a doctrine, and through that influence people grow
either fond of a government or end up being indifferent to it or loathing it.
Being raised in a certain mentality doesnt, however, mean that the mentality will be shared
throughout the entire life of an individual, as it may be influenced through re-socializing. The
best example in that respect is the one of Pierre Manent, one of the main pillars of political
philosophy, who grew up in a family influenced by a communist father, thus making him share
these beliefs during the first part of his life and shifting towards liberalism after getting in contact
with important political Academics such as Raymond Aron and Leo Strauss.
Hence, taking into consideration these two dimensions, the citizen that votes based on his
interior political roots and beliefs as well as the citizen who shifts from a political belief to
another for different reasons are both subjects of interest for our research, as we are striving to
show how the values and the attitudes of a person are reflected are reflected in the way he votes.
This correlation represents, thus, the main objective of this research, and in order to make it
feasible it is necessary to shrink down the framework to a specific section of reality. The section
we have chosen as the space framework is Romania, and as a time bench mark we have chosen
the fall of the year 2014, when the presidential elections took place.
Apart from the objective already mentioned above, we also tried to determine the universal
cultural model(applicable to the entire electorate of a certain candidate) for each of the 2

candidates of the second tour. Also, among the objectives dealt with in this research we must
note deciding the type of report between the individualism/collectivism and left/right axes.
The subject has been chosen due to its large mediatization on a national scale, many people
arguing that the winner was decided mostly through the means of social media. Our focus is
exclusively drawn upon the second tour, however, a tour extensively challenged by the two main
favorites, 2 contenders who shared different mentalities, different sides, different types of
support, different sides of the left/right axe(socialists left, liberals right) as well as different
roots.
Interestingly, the cultural aspect of the elections was very much ignored up until these
elections, when the media started differentiating between the social categories that have voted for
each of the candidates, which suggests the fact that Romania as a whole is finally starting to
shake off the old post-communist the population has been wearing in terms of politics, a coat that
covered everything in distrust, lack of interest, lack of hope and which turned Romania into a
malfunctioning democracy, a democracy in which votes obtain through corruption often decided
the victor due to the lack of interest of the people who would actually refuse to sell their votes
for petty incomes. That firmly suggests a new wave in the Romanian culture in what concerns
politics, and we owe it to the social media that managed to crystalize a Romania that was not
completely deceived by classical propaganda and dissimulation tools such as politically oriented
media trusts.
That being said, in order for us to delve into the depths of this subject we had to draw two
questions that would guide our entire intercession:

How did personal attitudes influence the option to vote for either V. Ponta or K. Iohannis

in the second tour of the 2014 presidential elections ?

Is there an universal cultural model in the case of the electors for both sets of
candidates ?

The theoretic framework

3

In order to recognize an universal cultural model for each of the two candidates we must first
define the basic layout. The research paper is built on overlapped layers. As such, the first layer
requires us to define the basic concepts that are going to be used. We cannot classify the electors
based solely on their decision, as it is important to analyze the factors that generated this their
choice.
Political philosophers such as Popper, Durkheim, Weber, Dumont, have utilized the
contrast between individualism and collectivism in their attempt to explain how society
functions.
Karl Popper is well known for his critics on the theme of totalitarian regimes, as well as
the way he defends values such as freedom, individualism and democracy. In The open society
and its enemies Popper affirms that individualism, freedom and personal responsibilities may
bring anxiety with them, but this anxiety loses its power when social progress, liberty, evolution
and good cooperation are assured within an open society. Hence, the compromise made by the
citizens once they embrace the individualist values is the price we have to pay in order to be
human beings believes Popper.
Louis Dumont on the other hand associates individualism with modernity rather than a
natural state of the human being. Also, Dumont approves of Durkheims views that states that
society leads us towards freedom. And unlike modern societies, the archaic ones do not know the
values individualistic values which in turn makes them compact, sealed societies. He also
distinguishes the differences between individualism and collectivism; he proves the point stated
above by analyzing Platons Republic in which the accent was put on the society, on the
collective expectations that would have to lead to the prosperity of the society.
Renaut Alains theory about individualism is very much alike to Dumonts, associating
individualism with modern societies. In his book, The era of the individual Renaut states that
the citizens own personal identity can be affirmed through his civic obligations, through
supporting democracy instead of totalitarism, and through supporting the human rights.
However, in order to properly delineate the 2 concepts it is necessary to mention M.
Weber and E. Durkheim. Both of them are renowned sociologists known for the huge
contribution they have made during the late XIX century. However, it is interesting to note that
4

somewhere along the lines there was a difference of opinion between the two, Weber, who is
considered the father of methodological individualism, claims that society can evolve through
the presence of liberal values, and hence, of individualism. On the other hand Durkheim denies
that argument, having proposed a different solution, a different type of social solidarity that is
bound to reconcile individualism with a feeling of respect and self-awareness in what concerns
the obligations of a citizen towards the others.
Coming back to the situation of the Romanian society, we can take note of the fact that
Romania is going through a process of assuming the individualist values, however this process is
hindered by the deep national and social collectivist roots that have been ingrown onto us. We
might go as far as to say that Romanian individualism is just an chimera dressed in liberal
actions. However, we can argument based on the theories mentioned earlier that individualism
has a close bond with the political right while collectivism is more tightly tied to the political
left.

Hypothesis
5

Admitting the idea according to which theories can not be definitive checked and their
probability is one of the sentences, in the assumptions construction we must take into account the
following: it must be non-ambiguous, clear, has to mention the reference universe. Their
construction must be correct regarding logics and semnificative for the scientific field. The
hypothesis must be testable, by that we must have data which we can obtain in order to test the
probability.
Our hypothesis "Cultural models of electoral behaviour. The location's influention on the
individualism/collectivism axis on eletoral option" is the following:
If the voters have individualistic attitudes than they voted with right( ACL-Klaus Iohannis) at
presidential elections.
After establishing the hypothesis is necessary the determination of the variables: dependent and
independent. The variable was defined by Doron and Parot in 1999 as being " susceptible
variation size of presentation of different ways." In our case, the two variables are the following:

Dependent variable: the vote for the right

Independent variable: individualistic attitudes

We are talking about the operational defining concept when we try to determine the sense of a
notion through the report to the elements that can be measured and observed.
By reference to the relationship that is established between the individual and the society we may
establish the following indicators in order to define the "individualism" term: personal dimension
(family, religious life, asociative life), values dimension (setting the defining:own good, common
good). Economical dimension (reporting on private property) and the way of decision making.
So, the operational definition of "individualism" is the following: individualism represents a
generic name for the etics of a individua who consists in the next: the individual considers that is
normal to take care of his own good and his family, the first one being the personal good after
that the common. He is confident in his decisions and independent from institutions, his right to
private life and opinions it's not influenced by the many.
In a world way too complex, the dichotomy of left/right is hard to define, being though to
determine through a set of concrete characteristics such as: freedom versus equality, progress
versus tradition etc.
The concept of right having as representative regime the liberalism, has values such as: social
values- individual liberties, equality in front of the law, individual responsibility; political values
- limitation of the power state, supporter of the rule of law; and economic values - market
economy which assures bussiness individual freedom.

The vote represents an expression of the state's citizens regarding the election of their legilative
representatives or executives in the leading organs. Due to its complexity, we talk about a system
of voting which was created by ArendLijphart.
Colectivism represents a generic name for ethic conceptions of a individual that lay on: the
protection of his family and of himself offered by the affiliation to a group, his decions are
somehow influenced by the institutions, right to personal life and opinion, private property.
The concept of left having as representative regime the socialism has values such as: social
values - indivual liberty under the watch of the state, equality in front of the law, solidarity,
equality rights; political values - the support of the state intervention in the relations between
individuals, supporter of socialist democracy; economical rights - controlled market economy.

Data Analysis and interpretation

I.1. We observe the fact that it starts with a filter question: How much are you interested in
politics? This is the first stop. We have 16 people that are not interested at all, so a percentage of
18.39% from the whole sample. The ones that did not answer or are not into politics are due to
the results people between 18-30 years old, housewives, unmarried without children and income.
Also,
these
persons
are
75%
women
and
25%
men.
I.2.Are you informed about the actual politics in Romania?
Here we have a tremendous carelessness about Romanian politics, 35,2%. Pretty much,
especially if we sum up with the 16 people who said that are not interested in politics. In this
way, we arrive at a percentage of 47,1% people, who more or less care about politics in their
personal life.
I.3.For the following news channels, please give a grade between 1 and 5 depending on their
relevance for you.
We observe the election of the internet and TV as main source of information, newspapers losing
a lot in this aspect. Internet has won a lot nowadays.

I.4.Do you think that voting is important?

We see a considerable recognition of the vote importance.(96%)

I.5. For the current politics in Romania, what grade would you give between 1 and 10?

Answers to I. 1
18
16
14
12
Answers to I. 1

10
8
6
4
2
0
1

10

Observations:

We do not have at all a 10 for the political situation in Romania

The biggest grade is 9, and the number of individuals that gave the lowest grade (1) is
higher
Most of the people gave a 5
Even though we have few 9 grades, comparative with the 8's are more numerous

II.1.Due to the fact the right/left orientation of the political parties in Romania, how would you
consider yourself?

political axe orientation

60%
50%
40%

political axe
orientation

30%
20%
10%
0%
Center-right

Center-left

NS/NR

FIG.1. Center-Right/Center-Left orientation results.

Having the results, the center-right orientation (47,9%) is over the results of center-left
orientation (21,1%).
Analyzing the results, it can be noticed that the center-right orientation (47,9%) is two
times more than the center-left (21,1%). Interesting is the fact that, the number of people who
chose the answer NS/NR (22 people; 31%) is greater that the number of people who have a
center-right orientation (15 people; 21,1%). This shows, once again, the lack of interest in
politics.
II.2. I will present a list of problems, please answer how important it is each one for you?
Interpreting the results, the ranking of issues in order of importance is quite tight :
1. Income
2. Taxes
3. Unemployment
However, unemployment had the lowest percentage of 4,22% (3 people), which
showed the lack of importance.

II.3. What is your opinion on the following ideas?

From the results of this question, we can figure out indirectly the electoral behaviour of
the voters. Thus, the respondents who regarded as favourable socialism, state property and
planification were inclined to have a left wing electoral behaviour and prone to vote for Mr.
Victor Ponta at the presidential elections from 2014. The rest of the ideas, such as profit,
privatisation, powerful sindicates and free competition, were ideas regarded to the right wing
electoral behaviour, being represented at the elections by Mr. Klaus Iohannis.
Analyzing the results, we have 124 in favour to the left-wing ideas and 184 for the
right-wing ideas. In conclusion, it can be noticed for the second time that the orientation of
voters is towards the right-wing (Klaus Iohannis).
II.4. For the following values, please give a mark from 1 to 5 according to their importance to
you.
The values, in order of importance were:
1. Family: 60 people gave a score of 5 and 5 people gave the score of 4.
2. Financial stability: 43 people gave a score of 5 and 17 people marked it as 4.
3. Marriage: 36 people gave the score of 5, 18 people gave it a 4.
4. Religion: 21 people gave the score of 5, 13 people gave it a 4.
The ranking was quite tight. The people who gave a mark of 5 to family, marriage and
religion are the people inclined to vote for Victor Ponta(left-wing). Financial stability is a value,
which was marked with 5 by people who were more orientated towards the right-wing.
III.1. For the following, please say how much confidence do you have?

10

The people who have "great" confidence and "much greater" confidence in the
government and the prime-minister, we suppose they are the people who have a more left-wing
orientation and therefore, will vote with Victor Ponta; 45 people out of 71 have a left-wing
orientation.
III.2. To what extent have you informed yourself about the candidates before voting ?

Electorate information criteria

50
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0

Electorate information
criteria

Fig.2. The level of information upon every candidate (%)

The interval in the chart is 5 steps.
According to the previous chart, the result is encouraging about the people's desire to get
informed about the candidates, which shows the voter's civic engagement. They are aware that
their vote counts and can make a change in society through their vote. This is the reason why
there is this great interest to find out which candidate they consider can solve most problems. As
to the question I.4. Do you think that voting is important?, confirms once again the citizen's civic
character.

11

III.3. On which basis did you choose the candidate you would vote for? Please enumerate the
main features.
It can be noted, that the voters desire a role-model president, a strong one, a president of
order, which will not be authoritarian or abuse its own power. It is desired a president that
protects its citizens, their rights and needs.
III.4. Who was in your opinion, the ideal candidate for the presidential elections of 2014?
Taking into consideration the results, Klaus Iohannis was the favourite of the respondents
in proportion of 56,34% whereas Victor Ponta, with only 26,77%.

Fig. 3. Categorized graphical representation of the entire sample (people)

In the chart, we see two types of scales: nominal (Klaus Johannis, Victor Ponta) in 2 steps and
ordinal scale (18-30 years, 30-40 years, 40-50 years, over 50 years) in 4 steps. The scale has two
variables: vote for a particular candidate and age.

age criteria
40
30
20
10
0

age criteria

Fig. 4. Representation of voters ages, without the respondents do not know / No answer (people)
This scale is ordinal in 4 steps.
Observations:

12

 We had a young sample since people aged 18-30 years were in proportion of 59,2%. The
remaining 40.8 % are people aged over 30 years .
Regarding Klaus Johannis, he received 56,34% of votes. s aged 18-30 is 43.6 %. In this
category, 39.4 % would vote for Klaus Johannis, which is quite an impressive percentage. We
note that a large proportion of young people are right-winged. Johannis had an advantage over
Victor Ponta, since from the 18-30 years old category, Victor Ponta was voted in a ratio of only
9.8%.
Instead, Johannis has little support from people over 50 years. In this category ,Johannis would
get votes from people over 50 years of 25% , while Ponta would receive 75% of the category of
persons over 50 years. Conclusion: The youth vote with Johannis , the elderly with Ponta .
IV.2. What is your current occupation?

Occupation criteria
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0

Occupation criteria

Fig. 5. Occupation of the entire sample ( persons)

Type is rated 4-stage scale .
Of the total number of respondents (87), 45.9 % which is 40 people were pupils or students. The
second category is represented by large collar staff number of 16 that is 18.9 %. There were
people who refused to answer - 3.44 (3 people).

13

IV. 3. What is your marital status ?

Most of our respondents were unmarried and childless 59.77 % ( 52 people). The
lowest category was the ones who were not married but had children - 5.74% (5 people).
IV.4.Between which categories of income does your personal income falls?
At this question there was a procentage of 11.49% (10 people) who refused to answer.
The most alarming percentage was 37.9%, which were the people who did not have any source
of income. Moreover, a similar high percentage of 28.7% was represented by people who had an
income lower than 1500 lei (25 people). The percentage of people with income between 15013000 lei was 14.94% and people with an income between 30001-5000 lei was 9.19%. People
with an income over 5001 lei, did not participate in this sample.
People who have passed the filter question, taking into account the socio-demographic
question results, were mostly people aged between 18-30 years, students, unmarried people
without children and people without income. Regarding the gender, we had a proportion of 45%
male and 55% female.
IV.9. The gender of all respondents.

Gender criteria

Male
41%

Female
59%

14

The sample was dominated by men, being composed of 51% men and 36% women. Is Paul
Lazarsfeld's study still of actuality? He demonstrated that "Sex is the only personal characteristic
that affects those who do not vote even if the interest is kept constant. Men are the best citizens,
whereas women are more rational. If they are not interested, they do not vote. Lazarsfeld
demonstrated that in women, the behavior is consistent with their attitude, which means that if
they are not interested, they do not go to vote whereas men who go to vote, they do it out of
conformism.

Conclusions
Our research hypothesis was: If voters have individualist attitudes, then they vote with
the right-wing (ACL - Klaus Iohannis) at the 2014 presidential elections. The hypothesis was
confirmed successfully. Individualistic attitude is an attitude "selfish" and has socialist
tendencies, collectivist. With questions that did not concern the vote, we managed to find
individualistic attitudes of the respondents. Questions that have helped us to find the real
attitudes were those who asked to recount how important unemployment or income tax is; What
attitudes towards ideas like socialism, state property, planning, profit, privatization, strong
unions, free competition; to order by importance values such as family, marriage, religion,
financial situation.
Most respondents replied by individualism indices: family, independence, religious life,
state property, choosing a proper good family and good socialist aside the common good. The
key question that we agreed with our expectations hypothesis and was question number 4 of
Section III: Who was in your opinion, the ideal candidate for the presidential elections of 2014?
The responses to this question have confirmed our hypothesis, namely, respondents who were
prone to an individualistic attitude, voted with the right representative, Klaus Johannis.
Our research took place on the field, encoutering many difficulties. We were in crowded
places in Bucharest, and people were generally reluctant and refused to take part in a
questionnaire. Cases observed : lack of time , lack of interest in general but completing a
questionnaire and disinterest in politics in particular. Statistically speaking , 3 out of 10 people
15

refused to participate in our research . This refusal can interpret it as a form of protest , a form of
denial of the Romanian political class . This research has revealed that people are not keen on
politics.
In our opinion, the individualistic attitudes of citizens were not the only ones that helped
Klaus Iohannis to win. It is interesting that Iohannis won the elections, and not his rival Victor
Ponta although only in Sibiu, Iohannis had popularity over its mandates as mayor and Ponta had
higher popularity. In addition, Iohannis's German nationality might have been a disadvantage
among other aspects. We can start from the assumption that: Iohannis's charisma, led voters to
elect him in the presidential election of 2014.
Through research, we successfully managed to confirm the hypothesis of our research
and even to prove theories supported by scientists who focus on individualism-collectivism case
and that is why we believe we have made an interesting research that confirms and strengthens
scientific theories. We proved that theory individualism-collectivism is still present and in the
case of Romania, that individualistic attitude is prevalent among the electorate.
While we were researching, we were aware that there is a danger of not achieving reliable
results because , while acknowledging his victory, Iohannis and his appointment as president of
Romania, there was a risk that our respondents abstrain to express their choice made at the time.
Throughout our research we observed that Romanian voters have a political culture quite well
defined since there was a split on the left-right axis. There have also been moments of reticence
and irritability in policy, in terms of respondents.
Analyzing the results of our research, we noticed two predominant types of voters, namely, the
predominant tipology of the voter who voted with Klaus Iohannis with age between 18-30 years,
student and unmarried without children. In the case of Victor Ponta, the tipology of the voter
were people over 50 years old, employed with upper studies and married with children. We are
dealing with two very different types together, even opposite. Iohannis has a great support from
the young generation. Regarding our young sample (18-30 years), Iohannis was vote in
proportion of 80%, while Victor Ponta by only 20%. From the sample of people over 50 years
old, Iohannis was voted in proportion of 25%, whereas Victor Ponta by 75%.

16

Bibliograhy
1.

DUMONT Louis, Essay on individualism, Editura Anastasia, 1997.

2.

DURKHEIM Emile, Despre sinucidere, editura Institutul European , 1993.

3.

POPPER Karl R., Societatea deschisa i dusmanii ei, Editura Humanitas, Bucure ti,

1993.
4.

ROSKIN Michael, Robert L. Cord, James A. Medeiros, Walter S. Jones, tiin a politic.

O introducere, traducere de Teodora Moldovanu, Editura Polirom, Iai, 2011.

5.

Cristian PREDA, Introducere n tiina politic, Editura Polirom, Iai, 2013.

6.

STNEA Rodica-Silvia Reobndirea firescului. Individualism i colectivism n matricea

atitudinal a romnilor, Editura AETERNITAS, Alba-Iulia, 2008.

7.

VLSCEANU Lazr, Introducere n metodologia cercetrii sociologice,

Universitatea din Bucureti, 2008.

17

Editura

Annexes
Study questionnaire of the electorate
Hello, my name is ., and I am a student at the University of Bucharest,
Faculty of Political Science and I am doing a study market on political choices. Your answer is
very important for this study. I mention that your responses will remain confidential and please
give me permission to record the conversation, since I do note your responses, I may omit
important issues. The time given for this study is about 10 minutes but can vary depending on
your responses.
For start, please tell me:
I-SECTION POLITICAL INTERST
I.1 . How much are you interested in politics?
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.

Very much
A lot
Little
Very little
Not at all
No answer
If the respondent will answer with a,b,c,d, the study countinues regularly, if he answers
with e or f, they will continue with section IV.

I.2. Are you informed about the actual politics in Romania?

a. Yes
b. No
c. I do not know/ no answer
I .3. For the following news channels, please give a grade between 1 and 5 depending on their
relevance to you.

18

a.TV
b. newspapers
c.internet
d. others . which ones?
I.4. Do you think that voting is important?
a. Yes
b. No
I.5. For the current politics in Romania, what grade would you give between 1 and 10?
Answer:

II.SECTION THE MOOD OF THE ELECTORATE

II. 1. Due to the fact the right/left orientation of the political parties in Romania, how would you
consider yourself?
a. center-right
b. center-left
c. I do not know /No answer
II.2. I will present a list of problems, please answer how important it is each one for you?
Very important

important

Less important

a.unemploymen
t
b.taxation
c.income

II.3. What is your opinion on the following ideas?

Favorable

Unfavorable

Socialism
State property
19

Planification
Profit
Privatization
Strong unions
Free competition

II.4. For the following values, please give a mark from 1 to 5 according to their importance to
you.
1

Family
Marriage
Religion
Financial
situation

III- ATITTUDE TOWARDS PARTIES AND POLITICAL PEOPLE

III.1. For the following, please say how much confidence do you have?
Not at all

Little

A lot

Very much

a.President
b.Government
c. Prime-minister

III.2. To what extent have you informed yourself about the candidates before voting ?
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.

Very much
Much
Not that much
Less
Not at all
I do not know/ no answer.

III.3. On which basis did you choose the candidate you would vote for? Please enumerate the
main features.

20

III.4. Who was in your opinion, the ideal candidate for the presidential elections of 2014?
a.Victor Ponta
b. Klaus Iohannis
c. I do not know/ no answer
IV. SECTION SOCIAL-DEMOGRAPHIC DATA :
In the final part, I would like to ask you a few social-demographic aspects:
IV.1 .In what category of age do you fit in?
a. 18-30
b.30-40
c.40-50
d.over 50
IV.2. What is your current occupation?
a.employed with upper studies
b.employed with middle studies
c.student
d. unemployed
e. do not answer
IV.3. What is your marital status?
a. Unmarried, without children
21

b. Unmarried, with children

c. Married, without children
d. Married, with children
IV.4. Between which categories of income does your personal income falls?
a. no income
b. less than 1500
c.1501-3000
d .3001-5000
e.over 5001
f. I wish to not answer this question
IV.5 Please tell me in what county do you spend most of your time?
IV.6. And city ?
IV.7. Please tell me your name
IV.8.Please provide me with a phone number.
IV.9. Male / Female
These were the questions. Thank you for your time and for your kindness and I assure you that
your answers will remain confidential. I wish you a good day!

22