1. law, govt and politics
2. politics
3. elections

Todd Donovan, post tenure review
Statement about scholarship
I’ll use this statement to provide an overview of the last five years of my scholarship that
was published (or now in review) in order to demonstrate a clear record of “sustained
scholarship.” There are also a couple of textbooks I've done several new editions of
during this time. Those are listed in my CV, but not discussed here.
My CV includes a full list of my publications. I do not keep track of my conference
papers or the titles of invited talks, but the CV lists most of the conferences and
universities I have presented papers at over the last five years.
One key measure of the standing of my scholarship is that it is widely cited, and features
prominently in the discipline. Google Scholar counts about 4500 citations, with an hindex of 34. Web of Science indicates about 1900 citations, and an h-index of 19. When
comparing these numbers across disciplines it is important to note that political science is
much smaller than, say, psychology or biology. We have fewer people, fewer journals,
and, thus, fewer citations. It is also important to note that alphabetical order of names
generally reflects equal co-authorship in political science.
Research interests: My primary research area of late is representation and electoral
systems, with a focus on public opinion. Among other things, I am interested in what
people think about the process of representative democracy, and how they come to think
it. I also have a continuing interest in direct democracy.
My primary tools for this research involve modeling public attitudes that are measured
with large scale public opinion surveys. Many of the projects below are the result of
questions I have placed on large sample opinion surveys funded with other peoples'
money. Recently, I have also been collecting data with experiments that are embedded in
different types of survey platforms (random telephone samples, systematic internet
samples, and opt-in internet samples).
Viewing the publications: I have multiple copies of my books in my office if anyone
wants to borrow them. I've set up my edossier, and a much better, separate webpage
version of edossier with links to the publications described below. I have also embedded
links to the publications here, although you might need to be on a campus computer to
view copyright protected publications
My recent research is classified below under three (overlapping) sub-areas; effects of
electoral institutions on behavior, public opinion, and direct democracy.
1
Effects of electoral institutions on attitudes and behavior
Over the past five years, I have continued to ask questions about how electoral
institutions affect political behavior. This includes questions about how different election
systems affect voter turnout, political efficacy, and trust in government. I summarize
some of this research from the last five years in this section.

Donovan, T., C. Tolbert and K. Gracey. “Campaign Civility under Preferential
and Plurality Voting.” In review.
Are campaigns more civil in places that use preferential voting (PV)? PV allows
voters to rank multiple candidates (rather than vote for only one). We expect this causes
candidates to be less likely to attack each other, since they want their rival’s supporters to
rank them second. We survey thousands of voters in dozens of US cities during local
elections in 2013 and 2014. We also surveyed hundreds of candidates by mail. Results
suggest that candidates and voters perceive campaigns as less negative in cities that used
PV (aka Rank Choice Voting, the Alternative Vote, and Instant Runoff Voting). Funded
by a grant from the Democracy Fund.

Donovan, T and S. Bowler. nd. “A Partisan Model of Electoral Reform: Voter
Identification Laws and Confidence in State Elections.” In review.
The US Supreme Court has justified state use of strict photo identification laws
for voters, saying the laws build public confidence in elections. We use a large sample of
US opinion data to examine if state use of id laws corresponded with greater confidence
in elections. We find the laws were associated with Democrats being more cynical about
their state’s elections in 2014 and with Republicans being less cynical about theirs.

Bowler, S., Brunell, T., Donovan, T, and P. Gronke. nd. "Election Administration
and Perceptions of Fair Elections." Electoral Studies. Forthcoming.
This paper tests how variation in election laws across US states affects
perceptions that elections are fair. We examine public opinion data from the US and find
better quality administration of elections in a state in 2012 was only modestly associated
with people viewing elections as fair. Cynicism about elections is better explained by
demographic factors (being a person from historically disenfranchised and underrepresented groups.)
2
Effects of electoral institutions on attitudes and behavior, continued

Donovan, T., D. Redlawsk and C. Tolbert. 2014. "The 2012 Iowa Caucus and its
Effects on the Presidential Nomination Contest." Presidential Studies Quarterly.
44(3):446-465.

Collingwood, L., M. Barreto and T. Donovan. 2012. "Early Primaries, Viability
and Changing Preferences for Presidential Candidates." Presidential Studies
Quarterly. 42(2):231-255.

Redlawsk, D, C. Tolbert and T. Donovan. 2011. Why Iowa? How Caucuses and
Sequential Elections Improve the Presidential Nominating Process. Chicago:
University of Chicago Press.
These papers and this book expand on a theme I developed in a 2009 paper.
America’s presidential party nomination process provides an unusual case of a sequential
election where information from early contests can affect behavior of voters in
subsequent contests. Part of this project is about Iowa per se, but my interest here is the
effects of sequence. Could Obama have won without early success in 2008 in Iowa?
Would Rick Santorum have gone as far in 2014 without Iowa. Probably not. Funded by
the University of Iowa, University of Washington, and WWU OSP.

Bowler, S. and T. Donovan. 2013. The Limits of Electoral Reform. Oxford, UK:
Oxford University Press. (link is to a review).

Bowler, S. and T. Donovan. 2012. "The Limited Effects of Election Reforms on
Efficacy and Engagement." Australian Journal of Political Science. 47(1):55-71.
This book and this paper present studies of the effects of electoral laws
(proportional representation, campaign finance, term limits, direct democracy) in several
nations. We develop a model of the politics of electoral reform based on the interests of
incumbents and their need to sell proposals to the public. We contend that despite the
way many electoral reforms are hyped as ways to improve public confidence, we should
not expect changes in election laws to improve public attitudes about politics.

Bowler, S. Karp, J. and T. Donovan. 2010. "Strategic Coalition Voting: Evidence
from New Zealand." Electoral Studies. 29(3): 350-57.
Strategic voting is often view in terms of the behavior of people who prefer a
candidate systems who has little change of being elected in winner-take-all. Rather than
‘waste’ their vote, these voters defect and choose a candidate they prefer less. We look at
strategic defection in the context of a proportional representation (PR) system. We ask if
people stick with the party they support most if they expect it might not have a chance to
be in government. We examine public opinion data collected in New Zealand and find
evidence of this form of strategic defection in a PR system. Data collection funded by a
grant to Jack Vowles, University of Auckland.
3
Public opinion, voting and elections
Another branch of my research examines questions about the determinants of
public opinion and political attitudes generally, and how attitudes affect voter choices.
Several working papers (not listed here) are attempts at understanding perceptions of
political corruption in the US and UK.

Bowler, S. and T. Donovan. nd. “Campaign Money, Congress, and Perceptions
of Corruption." In review (resubmitted with revisions).
Why do so many people think campaign money corrupts members of Congress?
Our survey experiments demonstrate that attitudes about campaign money are structured
by partisan interest but are also driven by information about sources of money and the
amount spent - particularly for large independent expenditures made possible by Citizens
United. Perceptions about corruption of Congress also appear to reflect aversion to what
campaign much of this money is spent on - negative TV ads. Data collection funded by
the University of Iowa and WWU OSP.

Donovan, T. and S. Bowler. nd. "Experiments on the Effects of Opinion Polls and
Implications for Laws Banning Pre-election Polling." In (Andre Blais and JeanFrancois Lasier, eds.) Voting Experiments. Springer. Forthcoming.
Some nations ban the release of pre-election opinion polls out of fear of a
‘bandwagon effect,’ where voters might gravitate to a media anointed frontrunner. Are
people more likely to support a candidate who is ahead in the polls? Our survey
experiments suggest some might, but this effect is concentrated among people least likely
to be exposed to poll information. Data collection funded by the University of Iowa and
WWU OSP.

Bowler, S. and T. Donovan. 2013. "Civic Duty and Turnout in the UK
Referendum on AV: What Shapes the Duty to Vote." Electoral Studies.
32(2):265-273.
Why do people vote? One answer is they do so out of a sense of civic duty. But
where does duty come from? Duty appears wrapped up in evaluations of politics and
politicians. We surveyed British voters during and after the campaign over a 2011
referendum on election reform. Low interest in politics, low political efficacy, and low
regard for politicians correspond with less support for the idea that citizens have a duty to
vote on referendums and at other elections. This suggests that negativity in politics may
erode conceptions of civic duty. Funded by a grant from the British Academy and the
McDougal Trust.
4
Public opinion, voting and elections, continued

Bowler, S. and T. Donovan. 2011. "Electoral Competition and the Voter." Public
Opinion Quarterly. 75(1): 151-164.
How do competitive elections affect public perceptions of politics? Since close
elections mean more campaign spending, we propose that competitive elections increase
attention to the campaign. We find it does (duh). We also propose that close races mean
more negative ads. As such, we find people in close districts are less satisfied with the
choices they have in the election.

Donovan, T. 2011. "Elections and Voting in Washington State." In. C. Clayton &
N. Lovrich (eds). Governing Washington: Politics and Government in the
Evergreen State. Washington State University Press.
This is a very descriptive, chatty thing about elections in Washington. Not peer
reviewed.

Donovan, T. 2010. "Obama and the White Vote." Political Research Quarterly.
63(4):863-74.
Obama’s 2008 election was cited by some as the dawn of post-racial elections,
where, given white support for a black presidential candidate, the Voting Rights Act
would no longer be needed. Turns out lots of white people would still not vote for a
black candidate - particularly if they lived near lots of black people.
The politics of direct democracy
I have been conducting research on direct democracy for about two decades. This
includes studying the effects of direct democracy on representation, on public attitudes,
and on public policy.

Donovan, T. 2014. "Referendums and Initiatives in North America." In M.
Qvortrup (ed.) Referendums Around the World. Palgrave MacMillan.
A chapter that is a remake of an influential book that provides an overview of
direct democracy globally. I've used this to develop an argument (I call billionaire
pluralism) that highlights the political diversity of massive sums of campaign money
behind initiatives and referendums in the US.
5
The politics of direct democracy, continued.

Donovan, T. 2014. "Direct Democracy: Lessons from the United States." Political
Insights. December.
An accessible, journalistic version of some of the arguments made in the 2014
Referendums Around the World book chapter. Not peer reviewed.

Bowler, S. and T. Donovan. 2014. "State Direct Democracy and Public Policy."
In Donald Haider-Markel (ed.) The Oxford Handbook of State and Local
Government. Oxford University Press.
A literature review and survey of research on how direct democracy affects public
policy in the United States.

Donovan, T. and C. Tolbert. 2013. "Do Popular Votes on Rights Create
Animosity Toward Minorities?" Political Research Quarterly. 66(4):910-923.
We test if people living in states that had campaigns against same sex marriage in
2004 became less sympathetic to gays and lesbians. We find the effect was concentrated
among people scoring high on religiosity.

Donovan, T. 2013. "Direct Democracy and Campaigns Against Minorities."
University of Minnesota Law Review. 97(5):1730-1779.
This article surveys initiative campaigns targeting the rights of minority groups,
presents examples from campaigns, and discusses how these campaigns produce a
backlash against the minority group targeted by the campaign.

Lawrence, E., T. Donovan, and S. Bowler. 2013. "The Adoption of the Direct
Primary in the United States." Party Politics 19(1):3-18. First published online
2010.
This article models the role that the initiative process (and other factors) had in
the dissemination of direct primary elections in the United States.

Donovan, T. 2011. "Redistricting and Direct Democracy." In G. Moncrief (ed.)
Reapportionment and Redistricting in the West. Rowman & Littlefield.
This chapter demonstrates that non-partisan redistricting systems are nearly
always adopted via direct democracy, and discusses the competing partisan interests
involved.
6
The politics of direct democracy, continued

Bowler, S. and T. Donovan. 2010. "Direct Democracy in the United States" In Jan
Leighley (ed.) The Oxford Handbook of American Elections and Political
Behavior. Oxford University Press. Paperback ed, 2012.
This chapter is a literature review and survey of research on the mass political
behavior associated with voting on initiative and referendums.

Donovan, T. 2010. " The United States Should Adopt a National Initiative and
Referendum" in R. Nelson and R. Ellis, Debating Reform. Washington, DC: CQ
Press. Revised, reprinted 2014. Second edition.
Chapter for an undergraduate text used in American Politics courses. There is a
disclaimer in the book stating the argument was drafted for the sake of debate, and that I
do not actually believe it. Not peer reviewed.
7