This document analyzes voting behavior and political participation in the United Kingdom. It discusses several key determinants of voting behavior, including party identification approach, partisan dealignment, and class dealignment. It explains how voting patterns have changed over time, from the 1940s-1970s when party identification was strong, to more recently as alignments have broken down and voters use more short-term, rational approaches. Social factors like age, gender, and social mobility have also influenced changes in voting behavior.

1. Name: Amir Karim-Ajam
Titleof Assignment: Anassessment of voter behaviour & political
participation.
Thisessay is about voting behaviour and politicalparticipation
among the United Kingdom’selectorate. I will intend to focus on
voting behaviour and politicalparticipationingeneral, as well as
evaluatehow it has evolved to the present day. The essay is
structured asfollows; firstlythe mainbody consistsof two main
ideas- partyidentificationapproachand socialfactors- that will be
developed and supported with evidence, then finally the
conclusion. The conceptsI will discussare partyidentification
approach, partisandealignment, classdealignment, sociological
theory and social factorssuch as, Age and Gender. These
determinants, inmyopinion, have led to a definitechangein
voting behaviour.
There aremany determinantsofvoting behaviour that characterise
the British electorate. Therefore, it is not possible to apply a
particularconcept toillustrateor determinehow people vote. The
mainconceptsof voting behaviour are: rationalchoiceapproaches,
socialfactorssuch as, Age, Gender, Ethnicity, Region;
partisanship, partyidentificationapproach (PI) and class
dealignment. Wherepoliticalparticipationisconcerned it is either
electoralor non-electoral, for example, cast one’s ballot or political
dissent. Over the yearsthese have been at the forefront of
psephologist’smindswhen determiningvoting patterns. The
reason being that each is to their own when voting. But I will be
focusing on thedeterminantspreviouslymentioned in the
introduction.
First of all, a maindeterminantofvoting behaviour ispartisanship,
more specifically, thepartyidentificationapproach (PI). The
reason being it is almost alwaysrelevant when considering voting
behaviour, becauseit is importantinrelationto how an individual
votes throughout their life. According toButler & Stokes thisrefers
to: “making a closely rationalised decisionbyvoting in line with
the commonlyheld views that they encounter in their dealingswith
other people”.i It suggestsvoters voted for partiesbecausetheyhad

2. identificationwith thepartyand had been socialised to vote for it.
Thisbelief was very accurateinthe 1940sup until the 1970s, but PI
declined as a result of class dealignment and partisandealignment;
thiswas a major shift in the way citizensvoted. The sociological
theory, which lies withinPI, refers to an individualwhom acquire
their values and beliefs due to parents, education, societyor the
environment. And so a person’s socialcharacteristicsinfluence
their participationinpolitics. For example, if an individual’s
mother is pro-Labour thenhe/she is expected tobe left wing, even
though thisis not always the case. Socialclassis the predominant
factor in voting behaviour. Peter Pulzer once remarked, with
famousclarity, that "Class is the basisof British partypolitics; all
else is embellishment and detail".ii The partysystem was regarded
as reflecting theclass system. But, thisis no longer the case, as
class voting has been less prominent inrecent generalelections.
New Labour had a cross-classappeal, especially with middle-class
voters in 1997. So, “middleclass” individualstypicallysupported
Conservativeand the “working class” were typicallyLabour. It
created and still does createpolarised viewsin different factionsof
societyi.e. north versus south, as though it was like supporting
football teams. Dunleavy & T.Husbandsstate “citizen’sattitudes
are extensivelyshaped by the processof partycompetitionitself”.iii
It is believed that partisandealignment and classdealignment led
to the declineof PI.
Secondly, partisandealignmentrefersto thebreakdown of long-
term allegianceof voters to a particular party, largely present since
1970. Now it seems strong identitywith either Conservativeor
Labour has declined. According to PintoDuschinsky: “Local
activityand grassrootsmembership effortshave seemed less
important ininfluencing electionoutcomes”.iv Thismaysuggest
people have becomeapolitical, resulting indealignment. For
example, “less than1% of the British populationbelongsto a
politicalparty. TheRSPB has morethan a millionmembers, far
more thanall thepoliticalpartiescombined”.v But thereare
reasons why dealignment hastakenplace: “1- Con-Lab twoparty
system beganto age, especially with third partyinvolvement. 2-
New issues emerged that did not easily fit into left-right spectrum:

3. for exampleout or in the EU; and whether devolved Parliaments
should be established in Scotland, Walesand NorthernIreland”.v i
The first is accuratewith theemergenceof the LiberalDemocrats
in 1988 and secondly UKIP, especiallyin the 2015 election. The
latter is true; normally economic policyis either side of the left–
right spectrum, but theEU issue is neither. But opinions do differ
when it comesto the principlesof the EuropeanUnion, for
example, the free movement of people.
On the other hand, class dealignment refersto the decline in the
relationship betweensocialclass and voting. The breakdown of
the class system has occurred due to socialmobility. “The“middle
class”/ “working class” dichotomyisseen as the major featureof
British socialstratification. Inthe 1950s and early 1960s‘class
voting’ meant politicalalignmentswereclass-influenced &
transferred on the samebasisbetweengenerations”.v ii This
suggestssocialmobilitydid not occur as much and nor did class
dealignment. However, “twentyyears after Butler & Stokes’ survey,
class balanceof occupationshad shifted considerablyinfavour of
non-manualgroups”.7 Socialclasswaschanging. Three
explanationsof trendsin class dealignment had arisen. “First,
occupationalclassis a weakening force becausesocialinequalities
have progressively declined. Absolutepoverty curtailed. Second,
the post war period was characterised bya rapid growth in
absolutesocialmobility. Third, socialmobility, development of
service industriesand growth of female employment”.7 The
differencesbetweensocial classes have been lessened due to
improved accessto higher education, greateraffluenceand
changesin the labour market (e.g. theincreasein women workers).
Voting behaviour canbecategorised asvolatile and stable or short
term and long term. In the caseof partisanshipand party
identification, it isa stableand a long-term determinant ofvoting
behaviour. But now in the present individualsareusing volatile
and short-term methodsof voting.
A further determinant ofvoting behaviour is agebecause age
correlatesclosely with partypreference. G. B. Shaw once wrote“ If
you arenot a socialist by thetimeyou are25, you have no heart. If

4. you arenot a conservativeby the timeyou are 35, you have no
head”.v iii Generally speaking the youth aremore left wing than
middleage or old age. Younger people are regarded asmore
idealistic- somewould say not at the age of discretion.
Furthermore, older individualsacquiremoreresponsibilities, thus
becomemore conservativelyinclined and aresusceptibleto
changesin society(for example, economic changeaffects
mortgages). ContrarytoG.B. Shaw’sstatement, intermsof gender,
it is women who aremuch more conservativelyinclined than men.
For example, “Men have given Labour a majorityat everyelection
since thewar; womenonly in 1945 & 1966”.ix Thismay be because
men were involved in tradeunionsat work and women had to
maintain conservative principleswithinthefamily.
But now, in the present, it seems that people are voting using
rationalapproaches, such aseconomic voting. Or picking a party
based on the policiesthey have to offer as well as their competence,
as though it were a “shopping list”.
In conclusion, I have considered in depth the generaldeterminants
of voting behaviour. They are: partyidentificationapproach,
partisandealignment, classdealignment, sociologicaltheoryand
socialfactorssuch as, Ageand Gender. But have also referred to
voting behaviour and its evolution from 1940-1970 and 1970
onwardsto the present day. In the present it seems individualsare
voting using rationalaswell as irrationalthoughtprocessesrather
thanalignment to partypolitics. Voting behaviourisconstantly
changing betweengeneralelectionsso thereare manyalternative
factorsthat affect a person’s vote.
Endnotes
i Dunleavy, Patrick, and Christopher T. Husbands. "Explaining Voting Behaviour."
In British Democracy at the Crossroads: Voting and Party Competition in the
1980s, 4. London: Allen & Unwin, 1985.
ii Lawson, Dominic. "Dominic Lawson: Class War Is Meaningless When All
Politicians Belong to an Elite." The Independent. January 19, 2010. Accessed
August 2, 2015.

5. iii Dunleavy, Patrick, and Christopher T. Husbands. "Explaining Voting
Behaviour." In British Democracy at the Crossroads: Voting and Party
Competition in the 1980s, 5. London: Allen & Unwin, 1985.
iv Dunleavy, Patrick, and Christopher T. Husbands. "Explaining Voting
Behaviour." In British Democracy at the Crossroads: Voting and Party
Competition in the 1980s, 12. London: Allen & Unwin, 1985.
v Coman, Julian. "Party Politics Is Slowly Dying. So What Will Take Its Place?" The
Guardian. September 8, 2013. Accessed August 2, 2015.
vi Dunleavy, Patrick, and Christopher T. Husbands. "Explaining Voting
Behaviour." In British Democracy at the Crossroads: Voting and Party
Competition in the 1980s, 18. London: Allen & Unwin, 1985.
vii Dunleavy, Patrick, and Christopher T. Husbands. "Explaining Voting
Behaviour." In British Democracy at the Crossroads: Voting and Party
Competition in the 1980s, 6-11. London: Allen & Unwin, 1985.
viii Denver, D. T. "The Era of Alignment, 1950-1970." In Elections and Voting
Behaviour in Britain, 33. 2nd ed. New York: Harvester Wheatsheaf, 1994.
ix Pulzer, Peter G. J. "Religion, Age, Sex, Region." In Political Representation and
Elections; Parties and Voting in Great Britain, 107-112. New York: Praeger, 1967.