Institutional and Discursive Norm Violations in Electoral Campaigns: Exploring Direct and Cumulative Effects

Previous studies reveal that while undemocratic behavior may be slightly punished by party supporters (Carey et al. 2022), most voters prefer a co-partisan who violates democratic norms over a rival candidate loyal to such norms (Frederiksen 2024; Graham and Svolik 2020; Krishnarajan 2022). Despite this progress, we still know little about the impact of different types of norms or whether discursive, rather than institutional, violations influence voters. The relationship between norm transgression and its intensity also remains unclear. For example, would voters respond differently to a candidate exerting pressure on media freedom by criticizing journalists versus one openly declaring plans to shut down a media outlet? This study investigates whether voters, in a multidimensional electoral choice, punish violations of institutional norms (e.g., electoral integrity, media freedom) and discursive norms (e.g., truth, civility, representative thinking). It examines how these transgressions compare to classic predictors of vote choice, such as partisanship and policy congruence, and explores whether combinations of discursive norm violations amplify their impact. We will also compare sub-groups of voters (e.g., populist, technocrat, and party-democrat) to assess how attitudes toward representative democracy influence reactions to norm violations. Data will be collected by YouGov in January 2025 from approximately 4,800 respondents across Italy, Germany, the UK, and the U.S. The paper aims to advance the literature on norm transgressions testing expectations derived from the U.S. also in new European cases, characterized by the electoral rise of far-right parties (Germany) or their encapsulation as leading party within government coalitions (Italy).