IT’S long been said that bad weather on election day can impact the likelihood of voter turnout.
Now a new study has found that windier conditions are more likely to result in a higher number of No votes in a referendum.
The analysis used data to examine the link between wind speeds and results on the day of key votes, including the 2014 Scottish independence referendum, the 2016 UK Brexit vote and a decade of Swiss referendums.
The team of researchers from the University of California, Harvard Business School, University of Zurich and Columbia University, found that the windier it is, the more likely that voters go towards “prevention-focused options” – such as rejecting independence or Brexit.
In contrast, on calmer days, voters are more likely to opt for “promotion-focused options”, such as being in favour of leaving the EU or the UK.
The study, which has been published in the journal Political Behaviour, said while the effect of wind speed is small, the results can be “consequential”.
It noted: “For example, in the UK Brexit vote, where the average wind speed on election day across the UK was 19.26 km/h, there were councils where the referendum outcome could have been altered had wind speeds been even slightly different.
“For example, consider Moray, where 50.13% of votes were cast in favour of leaving the EU, the promotion-focused option.
“If wind speed had been even modestly higher that day, all else equal, our model suggests that a majority of voters in Moray would have supported remaining in the EU.”
The theory behind it is that strong winds can induce “discomfort” which means people are more likely to overestimate risks and focus on safety.
The study found that councils with higher levels of wind speed on the day of the Brexit referendum were more likely to vote No – the “prevention-focused” option to keep the UK in the EU.
And the same result was obtained when for the day of the Scottish independence vote, with councils experiencing windier conditions more likely to have higher levels of No voters.
The analysis of 10 years of Swiss referendums found a similar impact – but that it only occurred in votes where there were two competing campaigns which focused on “prevention” and “promotion”.
The study said: “Voting on a windy or non-windy day should have little bearing on the political preferences of individuals.
“The present results suggest, however, that in elections that feature a distinct choice between prevention- and promotion-oriented options, incidental environmental factors like wind speed can affect vote choice.
“The studies show that the effect of wind speed on voting decisions is driven, at least in part, by regulatory focus: higher levels of wind speed increase a prevention focus that, in turn, increases the attractiveness of prevention-oriented electoral options.
“We found this effect through observational studies across multiple countries (UK and Switzerland) and elections. Furthermore, both field and laboratory studies corroborate the link between wind speed and regulatory focus.”
The researchers suggest that the impact of “incidental environmental factors” such as wind speed could be offset by extending voting periods beyond one day, or offering greater options to vote through postal ballots, for example.
They concluded: “For democratic societies and institutions, it is important to acknowledge that people – the demos – are influenced not only by the substance of a policy and the political stances of parties and interest groups, but also by the environment in which those policies and stances are scrutinised and transformed into an actual voting decision.”
