Running

 head:  EFFECTIVE  YOUTH  VOTER  OUTREACH  MESSAGES                                                               1  

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Towards  More  Effective  Youth  Voter  Outreach  Messages  in  Canada:  

 How  is  Trust  Built?  

Thesis  Proposal  

Arjun  Singh  

Royal  Roads  University  

 
 

 
EFFECTIVE  YOUTH  VOTER  OUTREACH  MESSAGES   2  

Towards  More  Effective  Youth  Voter  Outreach  Messages  in  Canada:  

 How  is  Trust  Built?  

Introduction  

In  Canada,  there  are  fourteen  different  government  agencies  managing  our  

elections:  one  for  each  province  and  territory,  and  one  for  our  country  as  a  whole.  

Nine  out  of  these  fourteen  agencies  undertake  youth  voter  outreach  programs  of  

various  types.  My  study  is  motivated  by  my  belief  that  these  programs  are  more  

important  today  than  ever  before.  Analyzing  survey  data,  Blais  and  Loewen  (2009)  

estimate  that  voter  turnout  among  Canadians  under  the  age  of  30  has  gone  from  

69%  in  1965  to  37%  in  2006  –  a  drop  of  32%.  Many  see  this  decline  in  young  voter  

participation  as  troubling,  and  a  growing  number  of  academic  researchers,  some  

sponsored  by  Elections  Canada,  are  trying  to  understand  the  causes  for  the  decline  
Sherrell Steele 10-12-15 3:52 PM
(Turcotte,  2007;  Blais  and  Lowen,  2009).    
Comment: How  are  the  first  and  second  parts  of  
this  paragraph  related?    
Other  scholars  seek  to  recommend  effective  youth  voter  outreach  activities  

(Howe,  2007;  O’Neill,  2007).    My  review  of  this  literature,  however,  suggests  a  gap  

that  can  be  filled  with  an  applied  communication  research  study.  Elections  agencies,  

non-­‐governmental  organizations,  and  interested  citizens  produce  promotional  

material  to  encourage  young  people  to  vote.  These  promotional  materials  carry  

various  messages.  My  own  preliminary  research,  detailed  further  below,  suggests  

these  messages  are  based  on  three  major  themes:  personal  and  group  power;  civic  

and  moral  duty;  and  hope  and  inspiration.  There  has  been  no  academic  research  

that  asks  Canadian  youth  themselves  which  messages  might  be  the  most  effective  in  

motivating  them  to  vote.  Current  academic  research  focuses  on  potential  reasons  for  
EFFECTIVE  YOUTH  VOTER  OUTREACH  MESSAGES   3  

low  youth  voter  turnout  (Blais,  Gidengil,  Nevitte,  &  Nadeau,  2004;  Blais  &  Loewen,  

2009;    Howe,  2007;  O’Neill,  2007;  Stolle  &  Cruz,  2005;  Turcotte,  2007;  Young  &  

Cross,  2007)  and  possible  activities  that  could  be  undertaken  to  address  this  

problem  (Howe,  2007;  O’Neill,  2007;  Pammet  &  Leduc,  2003;  Turcotte,  2007;  Stolle  

&  Cruz,  2005).  Framing  my  research  further,  I  am  interested  in  outreach  messages  

that  help  create  positive  attitudes  and  build  trust.  Putnam(1995)  asserts  that  

increased  trust  is  one  of  the  foundational  elements  of  building  a  stronger  

community.  I  would  argue  that  building  trust  is  not  only  the  right  thing  to  do,  but  

also  creates  longer  term,  stable  relationships  –  in  this  study,  this  relationship  would  

be  between  youth  and  the  Canadian  electoral  system.  Better  understanding  

communication  for  trust  will  be  a  key  element  of  this  research  and  will  inform  every  

aspect  of  the  research  process.  Thus  my  research  question  is:  What  might  be  more  

effective  messages  to  build  trust  with  habitual  non-­‐voting  Canadian  youth  and  

encourage  them  to  become  habitual  voters?    

The  overarching  goal  of  my  research  methodology  is  to  be  as  welcoming  and  

open  as  possible  to  the  opinions  of  youth  on  electoral  engagement  and  voting.  I  plan  

to  invite  non-­‐voting  Canadians,  aged  18  to  30,  to  deliberative  focus  groups  in  

different  parts  of  the  country.  These  events  will  be  planned  and  facilitated  carefully  -­‐  

informed  by  Edgar  Schein’s  Process  Consultation  method  (1990)  and  by  recent  

inductive  research  by  Mansbridge,  Hartz-­‐Karp,  Amengual,  and  Gastil  (2006)  on  

effective  deliberative  gatherings.  The  events  will  be  divided  into  three  main  

activities:  First,  the  participants  will  be  invited  to  share  their  thoughts  and  feelings  

on  different  youth  voter  outreach  messages.  Second,  the  participants  will  be  invited  
EFFECTIVE  YOUTH  VOTER  OUTREACH  MESSAGES   4  

to  engage  in  a  more  open  discussion  on  their  feelings  on  voting  and  politics,  on  trust,  

and  other  issues  of  relevance  and  interest.  Third,  the  participants  will  be  invited  to  

share  their  thoughts  on  the  most  important  themes  from  their  conversations    After  

the  deliberative  focus  groups,  all  the  conversations  will  be  transcribed  and  coded  

using  established  methods  of  qualitative  content  analysis.  One  part  of  the  data  will  

be  coded  according  to  Sherif,  Sherif,  and  Nebergall’s  (1965)  social  judgment  theory,  

which  explores  how  people  process  messages  based  on  their  prior  experiences.  

Based  on  what  people  already  know,  social  judgment  theory  argues  that  they  may  

accept,  reject,  or  have  no  strong  opinion  on  a  new  message.  The  goal  of  all  the  

analysis  is  to  explore  the  most  promising  message  themes  that  could  be  

incorporated  into  promotional  materials  encouraging  youth  to  vote.      

  The  next  sections  of  this  proposal  go  into  greater  detail  on  the  planned  

research.  The  literature  review  section  will  highlight  research  that  explains  why  the  

decline  in  youth  voter  turnout  is  very  troubling  and  identifies  possible  reasons  for  

this  decline.  The  literature  review  will  also  feature  two  other  types  of  studies:  those  

that  support  the  argument  that  youth  voting  messages  should  build  trust;  and  those  

that  outline  various  message  themes  in  youth  voter  outreach  activities.    

Literature  Review  

A  Solid  Foundation  of  Literature  

Sherrell Steele 10-12-15 3:49 PM
  In  order  to  better  understand  why  declining  youth  voter  turnout  should  be  
Deleted: the  

concern  to  Canadians,  I  explored  literature  that  provided  specific  reasons  this  trend  

is  so  troubling.  Additionally,  to  help  plan  the  facilitation  of  the  deliberative  focus  

groups,  I  explored  literature  that  supported  the  importance  of  building  trust,  that  
EFFECTIVE  YOUTH  VOTER  OUTREACH  MESSAGES   5  

examined  potential  reasons  why  youth  do  not  vote,  and  that  surveyed  potential  

messages  for  youth  voter  outreach  messages.  Most  of  the  research  I  have  explored  

comes  from  political  studies  scholars,  as  this  seems  to  be  where  most  of  the  current  

scholarship  on  low  youth  voter  turnout  in  Canada  originates.    

Why  Declining  Youth  Voter  Turnout  is  Troubling.  

Clarke  (2010),  in  her  report  on  a  national  dialogue  on  Canadian  youth  and  

democracy  held  in  2009,  talks  about  the  long  term  nature  of  issues  such  as  climate  

change  and  the  deficit.  Youth,  she  argues,  have  a  huge  stake  in  today’s  political  

debates;  however,  they  are  leaving  the  decisions  to  older  generations.    Blais  and  

Loewen  (2009)  point  to  evidence  that  suggests  the  decline  in  youth  voter  turnout  is  

the  main  contributor  to  the  decline  in  overall  voter  turnout.    Howe  (2007)  similarly  

suggests  that  declines  in  youth  voter  participation  could  be  a  significant  factor  in  a  

“further  decline  in  aggregate  voter  turnout  levels  in  coming  years”  (p.  14).  These  

studies  point  to  very  troubling  potential  consequences  of  low  youth  voter  turnout.  If  

the  overall  voter  turnout  rate  continues  its  downward  descent,  it  could  very  well  put  

the  legitimacy  of  future  governments  into  question.  Being  able  to  be  as  specific  as  

possible  as  to  why  low  youth  voter  turnout  is  a  problem  helps  me  better  explain  and  

disseminate  the  research  in  this  study.  

Potential  Reasons  Youth  Don’t  Vote  

  If  elections  agencies  and  other  interested  organizations  had  a  better  

understanding  of  the  potential  reasons  youth  don’t  vote,  people  working  within  

these  organizations  might  be  better  able  to  frame  messages  that  address  youth  

concerns.    Research  on  this  in  a  Canadian  context  is  at  an  early  stage.  Well-­‐regarded  
EFFECTIVE  YOUTH  VOTER  OUTREACH  MESSAGES   6  

practitioners  and  scholars  agree  the  factors  behind  the  decline  in  youth  voter  

turnout  are  still  not  well  understood  (Lappe,  2009;  Stolle  and  Cruz,  2005;  Turcotte,  

2007).    There  are,  however,  some  important  issues  that  have  emerged  from  the  

literature  thus  far.  A  strong  theme  is  that  youth  have  a  decreased  level  of  interest  in  

politics  and  less  connection  with  people  and  organizations  that  provide  information  

that  would  encourage  greater  participation  (Blais  and  Loewen,  2009;  Howe,  2007;  

O’Neill,  2007).  Blais,  Gidengil,  Nevitte,  and  Nadeau  (2004)  argue  that  recent  

generations  “are  less  likely  to  adhere  to  the  norm  that  voting  is  a  moral  duty”  (p.  

234).  It  is  important  to  note,  however,  interesting,  and  perhaps  counter-­‐intuitive,  

findings  on  youth  cynicism  about  politics.  O’Neill  (2007)  outlines  numerous  studies  

that  indicate  a  lower  level  of  political  cynicism  among  Canadian  youth  than  exists  

among  older  citizens.    Instead  of  taking  part  in  traditional  political  acts  such  as  

voting,  some  scholars  suggest  youth  are  turning  to  non-­‐profits  and  /  or  advocacy  

organizations  as  demonstrations  of  citizenship  (O’Neill,  2007;  Young  and  Cross,  

2007).  Turcotte  (2007)  argues  that  our  current  political  institutions  are  too  

inflexible  and  have  not  adapted  well  to  youth  culture  -­‐  youth  in  the  Internet  age  

have  unprecedented  control  over  their  lives  and  are  less  patient  with  not  feeling  full  

participants  in  society.  O’Neill  (2007)  argues  that  youth’s  “relative  withdrawal  from  

traditional  forms  of  political  engagement  might  be  due  to  the  hierarchical,  long-­‐term  

and  relatively  unsatisfying  nature  of  such  activity”  (p.  iii).  Socio-­‐economic  factors  

play  a  role  in  low  youth  voter  turnout  as  well,  chief  of  them  being  level  of  education  

(Blais,  Gidengil,  Nevitte,  Nadeau,  2004;  Blais  and  Loewen,  2009).    

EFFECTIVE  YOUTH  VOTER  OUTREACH  MESSAGES   7  

  This  research  will  help  inform  the  planning  of  the  deliberative  focus  groups  

in  this  study.  The  questions  asked  in  these  focus  groups  will  be  very  much  open  
Sherrell Steele 10-12-15 3:50 PM
ended,  but  the  literature  on  why  Canadian  youth  don’t  vote  can  provide  some  of  the  
Comment: Okay  but  then  how  consolidated  and  
analyzed?    
issues  to  explore.  

Why  Youth  Voter  Messages  Should  Build  Trust    

    Electoral  promotion  activities,  I  argue,  should  not  motivate  people  through  

fear  or  anger  but  rather  on  trust.  There  is  indeed  a  debate  as  to  whether  negative  

messages  are  effective  (Ansolabehere,  Iyengar,  Simon,  Valentin,  1994;  Goldstein  and  

Freedman,  2002)  but  there  is  a  deeper  reason  I  am  focusing  on  positive  messaging.  I  

am  not  only  interested  in  encouraging  voting.  I  am  interested  in  encouraging  better  

citizenship  and  stronger,  more  harmonious  communities.  Robert  Putnam  (1995)  

famously  argues  that  communities  with  greater  civic  engagement  see  positive  

impacts  in  many  aspects  of  community  life.  Putnam  (1995)  also  elevates  trust  as  one  

of  the  most  important  values  in  a  healthy  community.  Putnam’s  research  suggests  

that  the  decline  in  trust  within  society  has  led  to  a  breakdown  of  community.  Noted  

communications  theorist  Barnett  Pearce  (2005)  adds  that,  to  avoid  conflict  in  

today’s  global  and  increasingly  interconnected  society,  we  should  respect  and  learn  

from  the  greater  diversity  of  points  of  views.  In  this  study,  every  piece  of  the  

research  process  aims  to  build  trust:  accurately  representing  the  literature,  

choosing  data  gathering  and  data  analysis  methods  that  empower  all  participants,  

and  being  transparent  about  how  I  have  conducted  myself  and  worked  with  others.  

 
EFFECTIVE  YOUTH  VOTER  OUTREACH  MESSAGES   8  

A  Survey  of  Potential  Message  Themes  

  There  is  limited  Canadian  focused  research  on  potential  message  themes  so  I  

have  included  research  looking  at  the  American  experience  as  well.  Message  

development  and  evaluation  is  an  area  where  communications-­‐based  research  can  

add  tremendous  value.  As  mentioned,  there  is  no  academic  research  on  the  

messages  used  in  Canadian  voter  outreach  campaigns.  A  well  designed  study,  

informed  by  rigourous  principles  of  academic  research,  could  help  people  and  

organizations  promoting  youth  voting  be  even  more  effective  in  their  work.  Levine  

and  Lopez  (2005)  point  to  publicly  available  field  studies  in  the  US  that  suggest  

message  may  not  matter  all  that  much,  but  even  then,  they  still  suggest  message  

testing  experiments  because  the  “range  of  possible  messages  is  very  wide”  (p.  186).    

  A  few  different  message  themes  emerge  from  the  literature.    There  are  

appeals  to  personal  or  group  power  (Gerber  and  Rogers,  2006;  Howe,  2007;  Levine  

and  Lopez,  2005;  Southwell,  2008;  Tindell  and  Medhurst,  1998).  There  are  appeals  

to  civic  and  moral  responsibility  (Harder  and  Krosnick,  2008;  Howe,  2007;  Levine  

and  Lopez,  2005;  Tindell  and  Medhurst,  1998).  There  are  hopeful  and  inspirational  

themes  (Howe,  2007;  Mckinney  and  Banwart,  2005).    

Gerber  and  Rogers  (2006)  highlight  an  example  of  an  interesting  group  

power  message  that  focuses  on  social  norms.  Their  results  indicate  that  infrequent  

voters  may  be  more  inclined  to  vote  if  they  think  that  there  others  in  society  –  in  the  

larger  group  –  might  be  also  voting  in  large  numbers.  Tindell  and  Medhurst  (1998)  
Sherrell Steele 10-12-15 3:51 PM
discuss  the  very  different  presentational  framings  of  three  different  “get  out  to  vote”  
Deleted: the  

efforts    -­‐  all  focused  on  civic  responsibility.  Howe  (2007)  points  to  Elections  BC  
EFFECTIVE  YOUTH  VOTER  OUTREACH  MESSAGES   9  

advertisements  that  feature  emotional  testimonials  from  recent  immigrants  

promoting  voting  as  a  “valuable  right  not  be  forsaken”  (p.  32)  –  these  are  examples  

of  inspirational  ads.  All  these  different  themes  can  be  explored  further  through  the  

deliberative  focus  groups  that  anchor  this  study’s  research  methodology.  

Research  Methodology  

Design  and  Theory  

I  firmly  situate  this  study  in  the  applied  communication  research  paradigm.  

The  research  has  been  designed  in  an  effort  to  help  address  a  high  profile  problem.  

The  hybrid  data  analysis  –  one  part  informed  by  grounded  theory  and  one  part  

informed  by  social  judgment  theory  –  has  been  formulated  so  that  the  data  gathered  

has  a  greater  opportunity  for  relevance.  I  hope  that  elections  agencies  and  other  

organizations  that  promote  youth  electoral  engagement  will  find  great  value  in  

hearing  directly  from  a  group  of  young  Canadians  who  have  accepted  an  invitation  

to  provide  their  wisdom.  The  primary  approach  in  the  study  is  one  of  empowerment  

and  emergence,  but  I  recognize  that  some  who  promote  youth  electoral  engagement  

would  appreciate  the  more  focused  analysis  that  looking  at  messages  through  the  

lens  social  judgment  theory  may  provide.  

Inviting  Youth  to  Participate  in  the  Deliberative  Focus  Groups  

The  participants  in  the  deliberative  focus  groups  will  be  Canadian  Citizens,  

aged  18  to  30,  who  did  not  vote  in  the  last  election  for  which  they  were  eligible  and  

who  self  identify  as  habitual  non-­‐voters.    In  the  cities  in  which  the  deliberative  focus  

groups  will  be  held,  I  propose  to  make  contact  with  a  youth  organization  and  to  ask  

their  help  in  finding  well-­‐connected  young  people  who  match  the  criteria  for  
EFFECTIVE  YOUTH  VOTER  OUTREACH  MESSAGES   10  

participation.  I  will  invite  these  young  people  to  participate  and,  using  snowball  

sampling,  ask  them  to  invite  friends  who  also  would  match  the  criteria.    Each  

deliberative  focus  group  would  then  likely  have  a  relatively  homogenous  group  of  

participants.  I  am  hoping  to  add  the  element  of  diversity  to  the  research  by  asking  

quite  different  youth  organizations  in  each  location.  Such  organizations  might  

include  a  university  student  union,  a  social  housing  provider’s  youth  association,  

and  an  association  of  aboriginal  youth.  The  maximum  number  of  participants  in  

each  focus  group  would  be  10.    

The  Planning  of  Deliberative  Focus  Groups  

A  deliberative  focus  group  is  a  very  specific  type  of  event.  As  outlined  by  Ozanne,  

Corus,  and  Saatcioglu  (2009),  a  typical  deliberative  focus  group  offers  the  

participants  the  opportunity  to  explore  and  discuss  a  particular  issue.  The  issue  is  

relatively  fixed  but  the  discussion  is  open  and  free  flowing.  In  my  experience,  the  

facilitators  refrain  from  sharing  their  own  opinions  and  only  ask  questions  that  help  

participants  feel  comfortable  identifying  and  frankly  sharing  their  thoughts  and  

feelings.  The  venue  and  seating  arrangements  should  provide  a  comfortable  

environment  for  all  participants.  I  envision  the  deliberative  focus  groups  in  this  

study  to  be  about  two  hours  long.  At  the  start  of  these  events,  the  participants  will  

be  welcomed  and  will  be  updated  on  the  proposed  agenda  of  activities.  There  will  

then  be  three  distinct  activities:  a  viewing  and  discussion  of  youth  voter  outreach  

promotional  materials  that  illustrate  the  three  different  message  themes  discovered  

in  the  literature  review;  a  more  open  discussion  about  the  participants  feeling  on  

voting,  on  politics,  and  on  trust;  and  a  discussion  about  important  and  interesting  
EFFECTIVE  YOUTH  VOTER  OUTREACH  MESSAGES   11  

ideas  and  feelings  that  were  shared  by  participants  in  the  previous  two  activities.  

Energizing  and  appealing  snacks  and  refreshments  will  be  provided.    

  A  minimum  of  three  deliberative  focus  groups  will  be  organized  in  different  

parts  of  Canada.  One  is  proposed  in  Kamloops  BC  and  one  is  proposed  in  Toronto,  

Ontario.  Other  potential  locations  include  Whitehorse,  Yukon  and  Edmonton,  

Alberta.  As  mentioned  above,  to  add  diversity  to  the  study,  each  deliberative  focus  

group  will  work  with  a  different  youth  demographic.  

The  Facilitation  Methodology  

  Thoughtful  and  skilled  facilitation  is  key  to  the  success  of  the  deliberative  

focus  groups.  In  order  to  create  the  facilitation  guide,  I  have  looked  for  well-­‐

regarded  scholarship  that  provides  guidance  on  techniques  that  would  help  

participants  feel  comfortable  frankly  expressing  their  thoughts  and  feelings.  

Specifically,  I  draw  from  Edgar  Schein’s  Process  Consultation  (1990)  methodology  

and  from  an  inductive  study  by  Mansbridge,  Hartz-­‐Karp,  Amengual,  and  Gastil  

(2006)  on  effective  deliberative  gatherings.    

  Over  the  past  50  years,  Professor  Edgar  Schein  has  made  an  enormous  

contribution  to  our  understanding  of  organizational  culture  and  communications.  

His  Process  Consultation  method  offers  many  insights  into  participant  focused  

facilitation.  Process  Consultation  counsels  that  a  facilitator  be  very  active  in  framing  

the  process  but  mostly  invisible  in  offering  any  content.  The  facilitator  should  

empower  the  participants  to  identify  the  problems  and  the  solutions.  The  facilitator  

should  also  use  the  following  4  types  of  interventions  to  guide  his  or  her  

interventions:  the  exploratory  intervention,  which  seeks  to  explore  or  brainstorm  
EFFECTIVE  YOUTH  VOTER  OUTREACH  MESSAGES   12  

an  issue  in  a  very  open  way,  to  get  as  much  as  possible  out  “on  the  table”;  the  

diagnostic  intervention,  which  asks  a  lot  of  why  questions  to  try  to  understand  the  

different  points  of  views  and  feelings;  the  action  alternative  intervention,  which  asks  

participants  what  they  themselves  have  done  or  considered  to  address  their  desires,  

issues,  or  concerns;  and  finally,  and  only  rarely,  the  confrontative  intervention,  

which  asks  participants  if  they  have  considered  certain  specific  options.  Schein  

cautions  that  confrontative  interventions  should  be  used  only  if  it  is  clear  that  the  

participants  really  would  like  “new  information  or  ideas  or  advice”,  and  that  this  

type  of  interventions  should  come  in  the  form  of  a  question,  not  a  statement.    

  Mansbridge,  Hartz-­‐Karp,  Amengual,  and  Gastil  (2006)  asked  skilled  

facilitators  to  code  tapes  “of  ten  small  group  deliberations  from  six  organizations  in  

United  States”  to,  in  part,  try  to  understand  what  these  facilitators  saw  as  the  best  

practices  in  these  deliberations.  The  different  elements  of  best  practice  were  then  

group  into  themes.  The  findings  in  this  study  offer  some  goals  and  principles  for  the  

facilitation  of  deliberative  focus  groups.  Mansbridge,  Hartz-­‐Karp,  Amengual,  and  

Gastil  (2006)  report  that  their  analysis  of  facilitator  coding  suggests  that  

  For  deliberation  practitioners,  maintaining  a  positive  atmosphere  and  

making  progress  are  inextricably  interconnected.  In  addition,  practitioners  

value  good  emotional  interaction  alongside  good  reason-­giving,  interpret  the  

common  good  as  “common  ground”,  conceptualize  freedom  as  the  “free  flow”  of  

ideas  in  the  discussion,  and  view  inequality  as  multi-­faceted  obstacle  to  

deliberation  (Mansbridge,  Hartz-­‐Karp,  Amengual,  and  Gastil,  2006,  pp.  1-­‐2)  

EFFECTIVE  YOUTH  VOTER  OUTREACH  MESSAGES   13  

Mansbridge,  Hartz-­‐Karp,  Amengual,  and  Gastil  (2006)  talk  about  the  value  of  having  

both  a  good  environment  (“positive  atmosphere”)  and  good  goals,  about  the  positive  

impact  of  emotion  when  it  helps  people  engage  more  deeply,  and  about  the  

importance  of  finding  areas  of  broad  agreement  (“common  ground”)  rather  than  

always  trying  to  strive  for  consensus,  and  about  the  importance  of  everyone  being  

able  to  participate  freely.    

The  facilitation  guide  for  the  deliberative  focus  groups  will  be  based  on  the  

principles  and  strategies  detailed  above.  As  much  as  possible,  I  will  personally  

facilitate.  I  might  also  invite  another  facilitator  to  co-­‐facilitate.  Co-­‐facilitating  with  

another  person  would  not  only  split  the  work  but  also  bring  a  different  and  valuable  

perspective  on  the  proceedings.  In  a  worst  case  scenario,  if  I  could  not  facilitate  

myself,  the  facilitation  guide  can  provide  guidance  and  will  help  create  some  

consistency  in  how  the  events  are  run.  

My  Ethical  Commitment  

It  is  indeed  very  important  that  ethical  considerations  be  at  the  forefront  of  

this  research.  Working  with  young  adults,  some  who  may  feel  marginalized  by  

society,  requires  sensitivity  to  such  issues  as  power  differential,  free  and  informed  

consent,  and  privacy  and  confidentiality.    I  commit  myself  to  do  everything  in  my  

power  to  adhere  to  the  Royal  Roads’  eight  guiding  principles  of  ethical  research.  

The  Data  Coding  and  Analysis  Process  

  The  Deliberative  Focus  Group  conversations  will  be  recorded  and  

transcribed.  The  coding  and  analysis  process  should,  firstly,  help  us  gain  better  

understanding  of  what  the  deliberative  focus  group  participants  felt  were  the  most  
EFFECTIVE  YOUTH  VOTER  OUTREACH  MESSAGES   14  

effective  themes  for  youth  voter  turnout  messages.  Secondly,  it  also  should  provide  

some  sense  of  how  the  participants  felt  about  voting,  about  politics,  and  about  trust.  

  I  believe  a  hybrid-­‐coding  scheme  would  be  most  suitable  to  gain  the  

knowledge  I  am  seeking.  On  one  hand,  I  would  argue  it  is  very  important  that  we  

privilege  the  views  of  participants,  without  any  preconceptions  or  theoretical  

framework.  I  intend  to  faithfully  report  how  the  youth  coded  their  own  

conversations.  I  also  propose,  through  inductively  coding  the  data  myself,  to  draw  

out  some  important  themes  and  ideas.    

On  the  other  hand,  the  primary  goal  of  this  study  is  to  better  understand  the  

relative  effectiveness  of  messages.  At  the  very  least,  then,  I  propose  to  code  the  

participants'  reactions  to  different  youth  voter  message  themes  (activity  #1  at  the  

events)  with  the  help  of  a  communications  theory  called  Social  Judgment  Theory  

(SJT)  (Sherif,  Sherif,  and  Nebergall,  1965).  SJT  helps  us  understand  that  previous  

attitudes  often  shape  the  reaction  to  new  messages.  SJT  suggests  the  people  have  

latitudes  of  acceptance,  rejection,  and  non-­‐commitment  based  on  what  they  already  

believe.  This  is  a  helpful  lens  through  which  to  analyze  attitudes  and  to  analyze  the  

effectiveness  of  messages  (Robinson,  Raup-­‐Krieger,  Burke,  Weber,  &  Oesterling,  

2008;  Smith,  Atkin,  Martell,  Allen,  &  Hembroff,  2006).  Participant  thoughts  and  

feelings  about  the  message  themes  would  be  assessed  to  see  whether  reactions  

generally  fell  in  SJT’s  latitude  of  acceptance,  latitude  of  non-­‐commitment,  and  level  

of  rejection.  Thus,  I  propose  to  use  SJT  to  code  one  part  of  the  data  and,  for  the  rest  

of  the  data,  I  intend  to  take  a  grounded  theory  approach.  

EFFECTIVE  YOUTH  VOTER  OUTREACH  MESSAGES   15  

  The  technical  process  of  coding  the  data  will  follow  the  principles  of  

qualitative  content  analysis  (Elo  and  Kyngas,  2007;  Graneheim  and  Lundman,  

2004).  The  unit  of  analysis  is  the  deliberative  focus  group  conversations.  The  

meaning  of  unit  will  consist  of  a  single  distinct  thought  or  feeling  expressed  by  any  

of  the  participants.  Manifest  content  will  be  categorized  and  latent  content  will  be  

themed.    Abstraction  into  categories,  codes,  and  themes  will  emerge  largely  

organically  –  the  exception  being  data  related  to  attitudes  about  particular  messages  

/  messaging  for  which  the  codes  and  the  coding  process  will  be  informed  by  SJT.    

  Qualitative  content  analysis  is  inherently  a  subjective  undertaking.  There  is  a  

great  deal  of  interpretation  of  the  data  by  the  researchers.  I  plan  to  learn  as  much  as  

I  can  about  the  best  practices  in  this  form  of  data  analysis.  I  intend  to  provide  ample  

explanation  for  how  I  personally  code  and  theme  the  data.  I  may  also  ask  other  

researchers  to  code  and  theme  samples  of  the  data.  I  take  these  steps  with  full  

knowledge  that  the  interpretations  offered  will  always  be  subjective,  but  also  in  the  

hope  that  my  research  will  be  regarded  as  rigourous  and  relevant  to  Canadian  

elections  agencies  and  other  organizations  that  promote  youth  voting  in  Canada.  

Conclusion  

  How  can  researchers  working  within  the  field  of  professional  

communications  add  insight  and  energy  to  the  effort  to  re-­‐engage  Canadian  youth  in  

our  electoral  process?  This  was  my  initial  animating  question  as  I  embarked  upon  

my  thesis  application  and  research  proposal.  I  hope  this  study  helps  provide  one  

answer  to  this  question.  There  are,  undoubtedly,  many  others.  On  a  personal  note,  I  

have  long  been  interested  in  encouraging  more  people  to  vote.  I  believe  our  
EFFECTIVE  YOUTH  VOTER  OUTREACH  MESSAGES   16  

democracy  is  stronger  and  more  durable  when  we  increase  the  numbers  who  

engage  in  our  electoral  system.  Unfortunately,  my  long  history  of  voting  promotion  

has  been  made  up  of  largely  unsuccessful  endeavours.  My  hope,  as  grandiose  as  it  
Sherrell Steele 10-12-15 3:52 PM
sounds,  is  that  this  research  will  mark  the  beginning  of  a  record  of  success.  
Comment: Is  this  needed?  It  is  different  in  tone  
form  your  prior  paper.    
 

 
EFFECTIVE  YOUTH  VOTER  OUTREACH  MESSAGES   17  

References  

Ansolabehere,  S.,  Iyengar,  S.,  Simon,  A.,  &  Valentino,  N.,  (1994).  Does  attack  

advertising  demobilize  the  electorate?  American  Political  Science  Review,  88(4),  

829-­‐838.  

Blais,  A.,  Gidengil  E.,  Nevitte,  N.,  &  Nadeau,  R.  (2004).  Where  does  turnout  decline  

come  from?  European  Journal  of  Social  Research,  43,  221-­‐236.  

Blais,  A.,  &  Loewen  P.J.  (2009).  Youth  electoral  engagement  in  Canada.  Ottawa:  

Elections  Canada.  

Clarke,  A.  (2010,  Summer).  A  dialogue  on  youth  and  democracy.  Canadian  

Parliamentary  Review.    

Elo,  S.,  &  Kyngas,  H.  (2008).  The  qualitative  content  analysis  process.  Journal  of  

Advanced  Nursing,  62(1),  107-­‐115.  

Gerber,  A.  S.,  &    Rogers,  M.  (2006).  The  effect  of  descriptive  social  norms  on  voter  

turnout:  The  importance  of  accentuating  the  positive.  Cambridge,  MA:  Harvard  

Goldetein,  K.,  &  Freedman,  P.  (2002).  Campaign  advertising  and  voter  turnout:  New  

evidence  for  a  stimulation  effect.  The  Journal  of  Politics,  64(3),  721-­‐740.  

Graneheim,  U.  H.,  &  Lundman,  B.  (2004).  Qualitative  content  analysis  in  nursing  

research:  concepts,  procedures  and  measures  to  achieve  trustworthiness.  Nurse  

Education  Today,  24,  105-­‐112.  

Harder,  J.,  &  Krosnick,  J.  A.  (2008)  Why  do  people  vote?  A  psychological  analysis  of  

the  causes  of  voter  turnout.  Journal  of  Social  Issues,  64(3),  525-­‐549.  
EFFECTIVE  YOUTH  VOTER  OUTREACH  MESSAGES   18  

Howe,  P.  (2007).  The  electoral  participation  of  young  Canadians.  Ottawa:  Elections  

Canada.  

Lapp,  M.  (2009).  Young  Canadians  @  the  polls.  Youth  engagement  in  Canadian  federal  

elections.  [Powerpoint  slides].  Retrieved  from  http://c2d2.ca/young-­‐canadians-­‐

polls-­‐youth-­‐engagement-­‐canadian.  

Levine,  P.,  &  Lopez,  M.  H.  (2005).  What  we  should  now  about  the  effectiveness  of  

campaigns  but  don’t.  Annals  of  the  American  Academy  of  Political  and  Social  

Science,  601,  180-­‐191.  

Mansbridge,  J.,  Hartz-­‐Karp,  J.,  Amengual,  M.,  &  Gastil,  J.  (2006)  Norms  of  

deliberation:  An  inductive  study.  Journal  of  Public  Deliberation,  2(1),  Article  7.  

McKinney,  M.  S.,  &  Banwart,  M.  C.  (2005).  Rocking  the  youth  vote  through  debate:  

examining  the  effects  of  citizen  versus  journalist  controlled  debate  on  civic  

engagement.    Journalism  Studies,  6(2),  153-­‐163.  

O’Neill,  B.  (2007).  Indifferent  or  just  different?  The  political  and  civic  engagement  of  

young  people  in  Canada.  Ottawa:  Canadian  Policy  Research  Networks.  

Ozanne,  J.L.,  Corus,  C.,  Saatcioglu,  B.  (2009).  The  philosophy  and  methods  of  

deliberative  democracy:  implications  for  public  policy  and  marketing.  Journal  of  

Public  Policy  and  Marketing,  28(1),  29-­‐40.  

Pammet,  J.  H.,  &  Leduc,  L.  (2003)  Explaining  the  turnout  decline  in  Canadian  federal  

elections:  A  new  survey  of  non-­voters.  Ottawa:  Elections  Canada.  

EFFECTIVE  YOUTH  VOTER  OUTREACH  MESSAGES   19  

Pearce, W. B. (2005). The Coordinated Management of Meaning. In Gudykunst, W. B.

(Ed.), Theorizing about Intercultural Communication. (pp. 35-54). Retrieved from

http://www.pearceassociates.com/essays/cmm_pearce.pdf  

Putnam,  R.  D.  (1995)  Bowling  alone:  America’s  declining  social  capital.  Journal  of    

               Democracy.

Robinson,  J.  D.,  Raup-­‐Krieger,  J.  L.,  Burke,  G.,  Weber,  V.,  &  Oesterling,  B.  (2008).  The    

                 relative  influence  of    patients’  pre-­‐visit  global  satisfaction  with  medical  care    

                 on  patient’s  post-­‐visit  satisfaction  with  physicians’  communication.    

                 Communication  Research  Reports,  25(1),  1-­‐9.  

Schein,  E.  H.  (1990).  A  general  philosophy  of  helping:  Process  consultation.  Sloan    

               Management  Review,  31(3),  57-­‐64.

Sherif,  C.  W.,  Sherif,  M.,  &  Nebergall,  R.  E.  (1965).  Attitude  and  attitude  change:  The  

social  judgment-­involvement  approach.  Philadelphia:  W.  B.  Saunders.  

Smith,  S.  W.,  Atkin,  C.  K.,  Martell,  D.  ,  Allen,  R.,  &  Hembroff,  L.  (2006).  A  social    

             judgment  theory  approach  to  conducting  formative  research  in  a  social  norms    

             campaign.  Communication  Theory  16,  141-­‐152.  

Southwell,  P.  L.  (2008).  The  effect  on  political  alienation  on  voter  turnout,  1964-­‐  

             2000.  Journal  of  Political  and  Military  Sociology,  36(1),  131-­‐145.  

Stolle,  D.,  &  Cruz,  C.  (2005)  Youth  civic  engagement  in  Canada:  Implications  for    

             public  policy.  In  Government  of  Canada  (Ed.),  Social  capital  in  action.  Thematic    

             policy  studies  (82-­‐114),  Ottawa:  Government  of  Canada.  

Tindell,  J.  H.,  &  Medhurst,  M.  J.  (1998)  Rhetorical  reduplication  in  MTV’s  rock  the    
EFFECTIVE  YOUTH  VOTER  OUTREACH  MESSAGES   20  

                 vote  campaign.  Communication  Studies,  49(1),  18-­‐28.  

Turcotte,  A.  (2007).  “What  do  you  mean  I  can’t  have  a  say?”  young  Canadians  and  

their  government.  Ottawa:  Canadian  Policy  Research  Networks  

Young,  L.,  &  Cross,  W.  (2007)  A  group  apart:  Young  party  members  in  Canada.  

Ottawa:  Canadian  Policy  Research  Networks.