↓ Skip to main content

Are We Rational or Not? The Exploration of Voter Choices during the 2016 Presidential and Legislative Elections in Taiwan

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, October 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (73rd percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (61st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
8 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
4 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
21 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Are We Rational or Not? The Exploration of Voter Choices during the 2016 Presidential and Legislative Elections in Taiwan
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, October 2017
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01762
Pubmed ID
Authors

I-Ching Lee, Eva E. Chen, Nai-Shing Yen, Chia-Hung Tsai, Hsu-Po Cheng

Abstract

The decisions voters make-and whether those decisions are rational-have profound implications on the functionality of a democratic society. In this study, we delineated two criteria in evaluating voter rationality and weigh evidence of voter rationality versus irrationality. Furthermore, we compared models in two different elections in Taiwan to explore the reasons behind the irrational choices voters can make. Survey questions and an implicit association test (IAT) were administered prior to both elections among 197 voters in Taipei. These voters then reported their actual votes post-election. Model testing suggests that voters often are rational, but are more likely to make irrational choices in more important elections. Our findings indicate that voters generally aim to be diligent and to optimize their choices, even if they make less rational choices in the end. Further implications regarding elections and human rationality are discussed.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 21 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 21 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 2 10%
Student > Bachelor 2 10%
Student > Master 2 10%
Researcher 2 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 5%
Other 2 10%
Unknown 10 48%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 5 24%
Psychology 3 14%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 5%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 5%
Unknown 11 52%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 24 April 2024.
All research outputs
#5,519,340
of 25,775,807 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#8,888
of 34,787 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#88,526
of 335,244 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#230
of 601 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,775,807 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 78th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 34,787 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 335,244 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 601 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% of its contemporaries.