Electoral Participation in Municipal, Provincial and Federal Elections in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract.The purpose of this paper is to highlight the importance of social relations or social capital for voting turnout at three levels of Canadian government, paying particular attention to social contexts, socio-demographics and socio-economic forces. The data source is the Public Use Microdata File from theNational Survey of Giving, Volunteering and Participation, administered by Statistics Canada (2001). Results provide support for social capital theory. Those who donate to charities and/or volunteer have a stronger propensity to vote than their counterparts. Two other measures of social capital, social networks and participation in religious activities, are also related to turnout. However, their effects are comparatively modest. Among the social bases of social capital, community rootedness is an important predictor of turnout. Civic engagement or attentiveness to current affairs also significantly increases voter turnout at all levels of Canadian government. Finally, standard socio-economic and demographic predictors of political participation do show independent effects on turnout. However, with the exception of age, these predictors are not as consistent or as strong as social capital measures in explaining turnout. Theoretical and policy implications of the findings are discussed. Résumé.L'objectif de cette étude est de souligner l'importance des relations sociales ou “ capital social ” en ce qui concerne la participation aux élections municipales, provinciales et fédérales au Canada, en prêtant une attention particulière aux contextes sociaux et aux forces socio-démographiques et socio-économiques. Nos données proviennent du fichier de microdonnées à grande diffusion del'Enquête nationale sur le don, le bénévolat et la participation, administré par Statistique Canada (2001). Les résultats vérifient la théorie du capital social. Les gens qui font des dons aux organismes de bienfaisance ou font du bénévolat ont une tendance plus marquée à voter que les autres. Deux autres mesures de capital social, l'appartenance à des réseaux sociaux et la participation à des activités religieuses, ont aussi une corrélation positive avec la participation électorale. Leur impact est cependant relativement limité. Parmi les composantes du capital social, l'enracinement dans la communauté est un indicateur important de participation. L'engagement dans la vie civique ou un intérêt marqué pour les affaires courantes augmentent aussi d'une façon significative la participation aux élections à tous les niveaux gouvernementaux. Finalement, il s'avère que les variables explicatives socio-économiques et démographiques standard de la participation politique ont des effets indépendants sur le vote. Toutefois, à l'exception de l'âge, ces variables ne sont ni aussi constantes ni aussi déterminantes que les mesures du capital social pour expliquer la participation. Nous discutons dans cet article les implications théoriques et politiques de nos conclusions.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".