It is widely argued that party labels act as information shortcuts, or heuristic aids, for
citizens. They are purportedly one of the most useful of such aids because they are very
accessible and “travel so well” across different decision domains (Huckfeldt et al. 1999). Thus,
in the United States at least, the two dominant party labels – Republican and Democrat – help
individuals to predict the issue positions of political candidates, determine and organize their
own issue positions, and “correctly” select political leaders without possessing “encyclopedic”
levels of information (e.g., Downs 1957; Huckfeldt et al. 1999; Lau and Redlawsk 2001; Lodge
and Hamill 1986; McKelvey and Ordershook 1986; Popkin 1994; Sniderman, Brody, and
Tetlock 1991). Yet, there is very little scholarship that addresses whether party labels are
consistent in their utility as heuristic devices once we move beyond these two parties and the
American context.
We address this gap in the literature by exploring the traveling capacity of
party labels with respect to their influence on an individual’s policy preferences. Our principal
focus is on whether, and to what degree, different party labels, across different institutional
contexts, influence how individuals express opinions on a range of political issues.
Our data come from an experimental study conducted in three countries: the United
States, Canada, and Mexico. These three countries provide us with three distinct party system
settings: the U.S. has a party system with two stable, long-existing parties; Canada has a party
system that has been in flux since 1993, with four parties of differing age and reputation; and,
Mexico’s party system has only recently emerged from a one-party dominant state. Our results
show that the traveling capacity of party labels as heuristic aids is not a given: the overall effect
of party labels on the expression of opinions varies by country, by party, and by issue.
Research into the influence of party labels on opinion expression is important because of
its implications for the quality of democratic processes. In common conceptions of democratic
governance, citizens elect representatives who reflect their policy preferences (e.g., Ranney
1
For a notable exception, see Ray 2003.
3
Convention