Observed (in)congruence: The effect of voter-party distance on quasi-electoral behaviour

Narrowing the distance between voters and parties is an intended outcome for both sides. However, participating in elections requires individuals to invest part of their time, let alone identify the most ideologically proximate party to them. Extending from Downs' paradox, proximity voting is even more counterintuitive, as it requires voters to be thoroughly informed about parties' positions relative to theirs. Hence, one would expect that when voters receive personalised information about their affinity with the parties, proximity voting becomes less burdensome and thus more probable. To test this hypothesis, I conducted an online survey experiment in conjunction with the Cypriot Voting Assistant Application (VAA) for the 2021 parliamentary elections. Approximately 4% of the electorate took part in the experiment. Before being asked about their voting intention, the treatment group participants received information about their affinity levels with the Cypriot parties. In contrast, participants in the control group were first asked about their voting intention and then observed the VAA outputs. The results suggest that providing voters with personalised information about their affinity with the parties increases the probability of participating in elections and the number of parties they consider voting for, but it is not sufficient to switch their vote.