Review of Related Literature

Vote buying is a serious danger to electoral justice and democratic integrity since it
manipulates voter behavior and results in political systems all over the world. In order to
comprehend votes buying’s prevalence, mechanics, ramifications and potential countermeasures.
A comprehensive assessment is presented here which aims to highlight the multifaceted impacts
of vote buying on the political landscape.
Vote buying remains a critical challenge to the integrity of democratic processes
worldwide. As described by Joseph et al. (2022) and Canera et al. (2007), the practice involves
an exchange where votes are traded for rewards ranging from direct cash incentives to more
subtle forms of patronage. The pervasive nature of vote buying, evident across diverse electoral
contexts, necessitates a comprehensive understanding and strategic countermeasures
Vote buying adapts various methods to entice voters, reflecting its deep-rooted presence
in electoral systems. The diversification of strategies—from straightforward monetary offers to
more sophisticated forms of rewards—highlights the need for nuanced approaches in combating
such practices. The adaptability of these strategies suggests that mere regulatory frameworks
might not be sufficient to eradicate them, underscoring the complexity of the issue.
Researcher points to information campaigns and voter education as effective tools against
vote buying. Cruz (2021) have emphasized the role of information dissemination in disrupting
clientelistic networks, advocating for increased transparency and civic education. These studies
argue that well-crafted campaigns can enlighten voters about the detrimental effects of vote
buying, fostering a more principled electoral culture. Oladapo (2020) specifically notes the
potential of incorporating political education at various educational levels and engaging
community and religious groups in these efforts, thus leveraging societal structures for broader
impact.
The dual role of social networks in political engagement also demands attention. While
these networks can facilitate increased political awareness and mobilization, they also serve as
conduits for the spread of clientelistic practices, including vote buying (Oladapo, 2020). The
challenge lies in harnessing the positive attributes of social networks for political education
while curtailing their exploitation for manipulative practices
The provided empirical evidence highlighting the prevalence of vote buying among
economically disadvantaged populations, indicating that financial hardships are exploited in
vote-buying schemes Canare (2018). Over a quarter of the respondents in Canare’s study
reported being offered money for votes, illustrating the significant lure of immediate financial
gain over long-term democratic values. Additionally, it was introduces a behavioral model that
suggests voters only exhibit partial sophistication in recognizing and resisting vote buying. This
model implies that voter behavior can be influenced by improving awareness and offering
alternative, positive engagements.
Theoretical Framework
The Democratic Practice Theory
According to Berelson, Lazarsfeld, and McPhee's 1954 study, offers a sociological
perspective on electoral behavior that aims to align with the principles of democratic
organization. The theory critically examines the discrepancy between the ideal democratic voter
— engaged, informed, principled, and rational — and the reality observed in empirical research.
Findings suggest that most voters lack interest and motivation in politics, possess limited
knowledge about political issues, do not base their votes on principled reasoning, and often vote
along group lines rather than through calculated decision-making.
This conceptualization of voter behavior can be directly linked to the phenomenon of
vote buying in contemporary electoral systems. Vote buying typically targets less informed,
unprincipled voters who are not motivated by political agendas but by immediate, tangible
rewards. The theory's depiction of the average voter as being poorly informed and motivated
more by group affiliations than by individual political beliefs provides a fertile ground for such
practices. In this light, the theory not only challenges the idealistic view of democratic
participation but also highlights the vulnerabilities in democratic systems that can be exploited
through practices like vote buying, which undermine the integrity of electoral outcomes by
capitalizing on voter apathy and ignorance. This connection is vital for understanding the
practical implications of voter behavior theories on the robustness and fairness of democratic
elections in the literature on political behavior and electoral integrity.
Rational choice Theory
Rational Choice Theory (RCT) interprets voting behavior as a rational decision-making
process where voters choose candidates or parties that best serve their interests, based on a cost-
benefit analysis of the available electoral options. This theory is encapsulated in the spatial
model of voting, which argues that collective electoral outcomes, such as legislative decisions,
mirror the preferences of the median voter if all preferences are aligned along a singular policy
dimension. This model helps explain how individual choices translate into collective electoral
results.
Vote buying complicates this straightforward model by introducing an element where
voters may consider immediate material benefits over long-term policy-based voting, especially
if they feel their single vote is unlikely to impact the election outcome. This can distort the
median voter theorem, as vote buying might not only shift individual votes but can also shift the
median voter position itself, leading to policy outcomes that do not truly reflect the majority's
preferences. This highlights a potential vulnerability in democratic systems where the rational
choices of individual voters, influenced by vote buying, could undermine the genuine democratic
process by skewing policy outcomes away from the true preferences of the electorate.
Social exchange theory
Social exchange theory originally proposed by Thibault and Kelley (1959), provides a
robust theoretical framework for understanding various social interactions and behaviors,
including the ethically complex practice of vote buying. This theory posits that social behavior is
the result of an exchange process aimed at maximizing benefits and minimizing costs. In the
context of vote buying, voters and candidates engage in a transactional relationship where votes
are often exchanged for immediate material or monetary rewards. This exchange reflects the
foundational concept of social exchange theory where individuals assess the rewards and costs in
their social interactions (Thibault & Kelley, 1959). Voters may perceive the tangible rewards
offered as outweighing the intangible costs of ethical compromise or deviation from personal
political preferences.
Further extending this theory to the political arena, Redmond (2015) highlights how
perceptions of equity—or lack thereof—can significantly impact relationships, which in the case
of vote buying, can lead to systemic imbalances and dissatisfaction. This practice distorts the
equitable distribution of political power, privileging those who can afford to participate in these
exchanges and thus undermining the principles of democratic fairness and equality. The
reciprocal nature of these transactions fosters a dependency that may perpetuate a cycle where
long-term social and economic repercussions are ignored in favor of short-term personal gain. In
applying social exchange theory to vote buying, it becomes evident that this behavior not only
affects the dynamics of individual voter-candidate relationships but also has broader implications
for the health and stability of the political system as a whole. This theoretical application
underscores the adaptability and relevance of social exchange theory in analyzing complex social
phenomena and offers a lens through which the intricate dynamics of political corruption and
voter behavior can be better understood.
These past studies and theories underscore the critical need for robust legal mechanisms
and civic education to mitigate the effects of vote buying on democratic integrity. Ultimately,
addressing vote buying effectively requires a holistic approach that integrates theoretical insights
with practical interventions to foster fair and free elections.