Stimulating deliberative democracy through Voting Advice Applications: the effect of argument summaries on the proportion of non-directional answers and user evaluations

Although VAAs increase political knowledge and turnout, users often struggle to understand the political attitude statements they contain and rarely seek additional information outside the tool. Current study examined the effects of embedding supplementary information within VAAs. In Study 1, young voters on a laptop device either filled out a VAA without supplementary information, a VAA+ providing definitions of difficult words, status quo information, and party positions, or a VAA++ additionally offering summaries of pro and con arguments. Results show that all information types were consulted frequently, although information needs differed by the users’ level of political sophistication. Less politically sophisticated users more often accessed semantic information, whereas more politically sophisticated users more frequently consulted party positions. Providing pro and con arguments reduced requests for status quo information. Compared with the regular VAA, both enriched versions were rated as more useful, easier to use, and as increasing perceived political knowledge. The VAA++ also increased perceived political efficacy compared to the VAA without extra information. Moreover, both enriched versions reduced non-directional responses among more politically sophisticated users, suggesting that supplementary information facilitated opinion formation. Study 2 replicated the experiment with the same three tool versions on smartphones and among a more diverse sample of voters in terms of age. Overall, participants consulted supplementary information less frequently than in Study 1. Nevertheless, results again showed that information needs differed by political sophistication and there was again a tendency that the availability of pro and con arguments reduced requests for other information. Although no effects on non-directional responding were observed, both information-rich versions were again evaluated more positively than the regular VAA. Together, these findings suggest that embedding supplementary information within VAAs improves users' experiences and supports decision-making, while different groups of voters benefit from different types of information.