JURNAL https://doi.org/10.18196/jgp.123137 http://journal.umy.ac.id/index.php/jsp STUDI PEMERINTAHAN Factors Affecting Youth Voting Preferences in the Philippine Senatorial Election: A Structural Equation Modelling (SEM) Analysis ENRIQUE B. BATARA1 , ACE KRISTOFFER E. LABADAN2 ,MAROZEL B. ROA3 ABSTRACT The Philippine elections had been characterized by the presence of a weakparty system, a low information environment for voters, a history of dynasticrule, and the preponderance of media celebrities in elected political offices.These features amounted to the observation that candidate winnability in the country is discussed often as a “personality versus platform’’ issue, highlighting the importance of candidates’ personal background. This study examines certain variables associated with the voting preferences of young educatedvoters for the 2019 Senatorial Elections. Using a quantitative approach, this inquiry specifically sought to analyze the extent to which party identification,issue orientation, candidate orientation, and pre-election surveys affect voters’ preferences for candidates. Survey data were obtained from the 210 pur- posively sampled youth-voters, and were analyzed using structural equation modelling. On the whole, the results of the study indicate the positive association between the respondents’ party identification on voting preferences, as well as the positive association between pre-election surveys and the respondents’ voting preferences. Both issue orientation and candidate orientation do not appear as significant independent variables The outcome of thestudy has departed from the prevailing Philippine electoral trend where candidate personality-centered factors have been pivotal for explaining Filipinovoting preferences. Keywords: voting preferences, party identification, issue orientation, candidate orientation, pre-election surveys, voting behavior ABSTRAK Pemilu Filipina dicirikan oleh adanya sistem kepartaian yang lemah, lingkungan informasi yang rendah bagi para pemilih, sejarah pemerintahan dinasti, dan banyaknya selebriti media di kantor-kantor politik terpilih. Fitur-fitur ini sama dengan pengamatan bahwa kelayakan kandidat di negara tersebut sering dibahas sebagai masalah “kepribadian versus platform”, yang menyoroti pentingnya latar belakang pribadi kandidat. Penelitian ini mengkaji variabel-variabel tertentu yang terkait dengan preferensi memilih pemilih muda berpendidikan untuk Pemilihan Senator 2019. Dengan menggunakan pendekatan kuantitatif, penyelidikan ini secara khusus berusaha menganalisis sejauh mana identifikasi partai, orientasi isu, orientasi kandidat, dan survei pra-pemilihan memengaruhi preferensi pemilih terhadap kandidat. Data survei diperoleh dari 210 pemilih muda yang disampel secara sengaja, dan dianalisis menggunakan pemodelan persamaan struktural. Secara keseluruhan, hasil penelitian menunjukkan adanya hubungan positif antara identifikasi partai responden terhadap preferensi pemungutan suara, serta hubungan positif antara survei pra-pemilu dengan preferensi pemungutan suara responden. Baik or ientasi isu maupun orientasi kandidat tidak muncul sebagai variabel independen yang signifikan. Hasil studi telah berangkat dari tren pemilihan Filipina yang berlaku di mana faktor-faktor yang berpusat pada kepribadian kandidat menjadi sangat penting untuk menjelaskan preferensi pemungutan suara Filipina. Kata kunci: preferensi pemungutan suara, identifikasi partai, orientasi isu, orientasi kandidat, survei pra-pemilihan, perilaku memilih 242 AFFILIATION: Department of Political Science Mindanao State University-Iligan Institute of Technology Iligan City, Philippines CORRESPONDENCE: - HOW TO CITATE: Enrique B. Batara, Ace Kristoffer E. Labadan, Marozel B. Roa. (2021).Factors Affecting Youth Voting Preferences in the Philippine Senatorial Election: A StructuralEquation Modelling (SEM) Analysis. Jurnal Studi Pemerintahan (Journal of Government & Politics), 12 (3) 242-264 ARTICLE HISTORY: Received: 2021-10-20 Revision: 2021-10-24 Accepted: 2021-10-28 https://doi.org/10.18196/jgp.123137 http://journal.umy.ac.id/index.php/jsp https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0655-5288 https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4040-3755 https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4175-8294 Vol. 12 No. 3 November 2021 INTRODUCTION Understanding electoral outcomes hinges on the evalu-ation of what makes voters vote as they do. Socio-demo- graphic background of voters, such as sex and ethnicity, are being considered to have influenced voter’s selection of candidates (Kittilson, 2016; Banerjee and Pande, 2008; Cutler, 2002). One persuasive and enduring conceptualization is that many voters think that candidates or party leaders who share a voter’s characteristics are more likely to act in that person’s inter-est when in office (Cutler, 2002). Yet this form of reasoning has been argued to be insufficient in explaining voters’ choices dur- ing elections. Certain scholars claimed that a voter’s sense of attachment to a political party (Aiba, 2002; Klein and Baum, 2001; Ranney, 1999; Campbell et al., 1954), important political issues or voter’s policy preferences (Ranney, 1999; Walgrave et al., 2017), and voter’s evaluation of the personal qualities or backgrounds of the candidates, above and beyond the latter’s issue positions or party ties (Popkin, 1994; Lawrence, 1978; Pitkin, 1967) have high salience on voting preferences. Other scholars also identified the influence of pre-election polls to voting preferences, and noted the bandwagon or underdog effect of these polls towards the voters (Dahlgaard et al., 2017; Michniewicz and Vandello, 2013 Donsbach, 2001). Those contentions are in part fueled by the fact that across many countries that practice democratic elections, the contexts and relevant factors in play vary widely. In the Philippines for instance, elections are characterized by the preponderance of media personalities or celebrities and members of political clans in elected political offices where most lack the merit and only enjoyed the undue advantages of wealth, exposure, and name recall, among others. This observation is underpinned by previ - ous studies which revealed that candidate winnability in the coun- try is discussed often as a ‘‘personality versus platform’’ issue, and that during elections, voters would resort to candidate-cen- tered factors rather than issue-based ones (David and Legara, 2015). 243 JURNAL STUDI PEMERINTAHAN Some studies also claimed that Filipino voters do not con- sider political party affiliation a useful basis for selecting the can- didate they will support, as the country is characterized to have a weak party system (David and Legara, 2015; Ufen, 2008; Social Weather Station, 2007; Pertierra, 1988; Ando, 1969). Many stud- ies also focused on the voters’ opinion of candidates’ qualities or backgrounds in explaining the voting preferences of the Filipi- nos (Murcia and Bolo, 2016; David and Legara, 2015; Gallardo, 2015). This research is grounded on certain considerations. First, according to the Philippine Commission on Elections (COMELEC), the voters for the 2019 elections was dominated by young people, since one-third of the voting population come from the young demographic (Patinio, 2018). It is therefore rel- evant to look into the voting preferences of the young voters. Second, although numerous studies were conducted in the past explaining Filipino voting preferences, and literatures reviewed found that candidate-centered factors are determinants for vot- ing preferences in the Philippines, this study is based on a differ- ent context. The Philippine electoral environment at present is characterized by the presence of issues that are crucial and criti - cal; opposition and pro-administration parties have apparent stance; and pre-election polls are mainstreamed in media out- lets. Therefrom, it is equally important to examine the potential influence of the aforementioned to the voting preference of vot- ers. Thus, this study examined certain variables in determining young and educated voters’ preference in the 2019 Philippine senatorial elections. These include party identification, issue ori - entation, candidate orientation, and pre-election surveys. Spe- cifically, this paper sought to answer this question: to what ex- tent are party identification, candidate orientation, issue orien- tation, and pre-election surveys associated with voting preferences of the respondents? 244 Vol. 12 No. 3 November 2021 LITERATURE REVIEW AND HYPOTHESIS FORMULATION Attitudinal analysis of voting by (Fishbein and Coombs;1974) examines the major factors relevant to an individual’s decision to vote and to his choice of candidate. It argues that social char- acteristics are inadequate in determining political preferences mainly voting. Apart from the sense of civic obligation to vote are other essential factors which include party identification, concern with issues, personal attachment to candidates, opinion over the candidate’s personality, conformity to grou p standards, and the sense of efficacy. Thus, this theory assumes that in a political arena, a person should like or dislike a given candidate because (a) he believes the candidate has certain personal char - acteristics (Popkin, 1994), is affiliated with certain reference groups (Aiba, 2002; Klein and Baum, 2001), or is for or against various issues (Ranney, 1999; Popkin, 1994); and (b) evaluated these characteristics, groups and issues positively or negatively (Fishbein and Coombs, 1974). VOTING PREFERENCE Voting preference is one dimension of voting behavior which refers to what makes people prefer one party or candidate over other parties and candidates (Roskin et al., 1997). Accordingly, the basic factors that affect voters’ decision are the voters’ bio- logical nature and needs, their psychological makeups, their membership in social groups, and the communications they re- ceive (Ranney, 1999). (Cutler; 2002) explained that many voters tend to think that candidates and party leaders who share a voter’s characteristics are more likely to act in that person’s interest when in office. But while socio-demographic factors and socio-economic char- acteristics are significant in the explanation of vote choice (Roskin et al., 1997), these are not enough in the understanding of how and why people preferred one party or candidate over the other (Aiba, 2002). (Ranney; 1999) explained that voters’ socio-demo- graphic status cannot simply determine their preferences. He found out that most voters choose candidates on the basis of their feeling or sense of attachment to a particular party from which a candidate belongs, orientations on specific issues of 245 JURNAL STUDI PEMERINTAHAN public policy, and their evaluation on the personal characteris- tics of the candidates. Thus, the first step in understanding how and why people vote as they do is to understand how they feel about the parties, issues, and the candidates. PARTY IDENTIFICATION In modern democracies, voters are found aligned or identi- fied with a political party. Electorates identify themselves to a party and these partisan loyalties is seen to influence their vot- ing choice (Ranney, 1999). This identification amounted from the voters’ assumption that a particular party could serve their political, economic, and social interests (Green, 2002). Thus, in this case, voting choice is determined by the voters’ feeling to- wards the political party of the candidate (Sarlamanov and Jovanoski, 2014). Certain scholars agreed that those who strongly preferred a party were more stable and predictable than voters who moderately identified a party or were independent in vot- ing patterns (Lachat, 2006; Yu, 2004; Miller, 1991). Some studies emphasized the significance of party identifica - tion towards the voters’ preferences. (Liu; 2007) found out its importance to vote choice in Taiwan presidential elections which he observed has increased overtime and remained constant be- tween the 1996 and 2004 elections. He also noted that while political communication in election campaigns in Taiwan may have changed with its increasing emphasis on highlighting party candidates, the political psychology of voting pattern has not changed too much since partisanship still dominates Taiwanese voting behavior in presidential elections (Liu, 2007). Garzia and (Viotti, 2013) also found out that party identifications appear still central in Italians’ voting choice since 1990, and these identifica - tions are shaped by two variables, which exert both a direct and indirect effect on vote: (1) party-voter proximity on issues; (2) and party leader evaluations especially in a highly personalized political context like the Second Italian Republic. This study hypothesizes that: 246 Vol. 12 No. 3 November 2021 247 H1: Party identification is associated with the respondents’ voting preferences. ISSUE ORIENTATION While some scholars would claim that citizens rarely, or not at all, vote on the basis of their issue opinions (Lenz, 2012; Campbell et. al, 1954), others would argue that the awareness, concern, perception, and opinion on political issues can exert influence on voting preferences (Aardal, 2005; Ranney, 1999), especially when one’s party identification is weak or absent (Yu, 2004). (Walgrave et. al., 2017) summarized into three ways how voters’ issue orientations can affect their electoral choices. First isthe perception on the parties’ or candidates’ issue positions. That is, voters care about how close candidates’ or parties’ positions are to their own, and whether candidates and parties stay on the same side of an issue as they are. Second is the idea of competence. It holds that people vote for the party or candidate that they consider to be most competent to tackle, or solve, an issue. Third, is the idea is that people tend to vote for parties that theyconsider to be especially committed to tackle the policy issuesthey themselves care about. It holds that issue voting is not only a matter of agreeing with parties positionally and of considering parties as competent (or not) to deal with specific policy issues, but that it is also a matter of appreciating the priority parties giveto specific issues (Walgrave et. al, 2017). Studies from several scholars also underpin the abovemen- tioned. (Aardal, 2005) assumes that voters cast their ballots on the basis of valence issues. These are issues on which both voters and parties agree on the same overall policy goals. He found that when a party or a candidate is regarded to be the ‘owner’ of the issue - that is, considered as best able to handle an issue, people tend to vote for it. The study of (Markel, 2010), for example, noted the popularity of LGBT candidates and political parties ought to represent them among the LGBT community, given the latter’s JURNAL STUDI PEMERINTAHAN constant attempt to gain political representation. (Baker and Greene, 2015), moreover, discussed the idea of positional issue voting which occurs when a voter chooses the candidate whose publicly announced platform best approximates the voter’s own policy preferences. Some work also combined positional and competence considerations as drivers of the vote choice (Bélanger and Meguids, 2008; Green and Hobolt, 2008). In addition, (Kriesi and Sciarni, 2004) noted that not all is- sues have a consistent impact on voters’ decision. In their study, they found out that only issues that are highly familiar and polar - izing, and which address problems of the highest priority, have a strong impact on voting choices among Swiss electorates. In like manner, issue positions of parties and candidates on key policy issues, such as education, health, and employment, have been the most important basis for voting by electorates in Ghana (Adams and Agomor, 2015). This study hypothesizes that: H2: Issue orientation is associated with the respondents’ vot - ing preferences. CANDIDATE ORIENTATION Candidate orientation is the structuring of political events in terms of a personal attraction to one of the major personalities involved (Campbell, 1954). Citizens do evaluate candidates in terms of their ability to act as according to their positions, above and beyond their issue positions or party ties (Lawrence, 1978).It excludes evaluations based on issue positions or party affilia - tion but focus on remarks like “I like him”, “the candidate’s smile”, or any judgments that indicate likeness and preference.Thus, when one votes for a candidate because of a convictionthat he or she is intelligent and forward-looking, then candidate orientation is the prime factor (Ranney, 1999). (Popkin, 1994) noted that in making political decisions, voters rely on informational shortcuts and heuristics. Candidate traits are considered to be useful heuristics as they are relatively easy to 248 Vol. 12 No. 3 November 2021 249 assess compared to intricate policy positions (Kinder and Abelson, 1981), and have been an inexpensive way to gain information about the candidates and simplify vote decisions (Hardy, 2014; Popkin 1994). Candidate traits “offer an appealing shortcut for citizens to evaluate candidates on their performances without having to invest considerable time and energy into following public affairs or uncovering candidate issues” (Funk, 1996 as cited in Hardy, 2014, p.4). (Kinder and Abelson, 1981) suggest the influence of nonver- bal factor in voters’ assessment of candidates’ qualities. In their study, electorates evaluate candidates’ competence, honesty, warmth and strength on the basis of physical appearance, and found that these evaluations affect voting preferences. (Rosenberg et al., 1986) also used photographic image of the candidates and voters were asked to evaluate them in terms of likableness, integrity, competence, and leadership ability. They found that image evaluations create a general evaluation in terms of the credibility and competence of candidate for public office, and these influ-ence votes when voters have limited basis of judgment (Rosenberget al., 1986). (Miller and Shanks, 1996) also posited that voters already have knowledge structures and organized cognitions about candidates in their political role which would serve as their basis on casting votes. Voters actually concentrate on instrumental concerns about the manner in which a candidate would conduct governmental affairs, and candidate appearance is possibly the most important (or at least frequently employed) of the low information heuris- tics that can guide citizens’ voting decisions (Lau and Redlawsk, 2001). Moreover, quality differences among candidates can arise from many reasons, including charisma, experience, incumbency, ad- vertising, and other non-policy dimensions (Aragones and Pal- frey, 2004), including honesty, morality, compassion, competence, and leadership ability of the candidates (Miller and Shanks, 1996). These qualities are sought to influence the voting choice of the JURNAL STUDI PEMERINTAHAN electorates. (Lee, 2001) noted that a candidate’s incumbency has a signifi - cant causal effect of raising the probability of subsequent elec- toral success. This success of the incumbent can be attributed to voters’ valuation of politician’s experience. Also, the role of name recall can be attributed to voters’ preference on incumbent offi - cials (Byrne & Pueschel, 1974). The findings of (Hazarika, 2015) for example, revealed that candidates’ political experience has strongly influence Indian electorates. He noted that candidates who have previously held political positions are likely to be well known in the constituency from their history of solving prob- lems in office (Hazarika, 2015). There is evidence that leaders’ level of education has a posi- tive effect on governance outcomes, thereby educational back- ground has been largely looked into by voters. The study of (Hossain et al., 2017), for example, found out that candidates’ qualifications, especially their educational attainment, had the highest effect on voting decisions among constituents in the lo- cal areas of Bangladesh. The study of (Horiuchi et al., 2016) however, revealed the dis- crepancy between voters’ preferences and the actual attributes of politicians in Japan. Their results revealed that despite the fact that there are many elderly, celebrity, dynastic, and male politicians in Japan, voters do not appear to prefer older politicians or celebrities, and are indifferent with regard to dynastic family tiesand gender. Furthermore, they found that these preferences areconsistent regardless of whether voters consider the different electoral system contexts of the mixed-member bicameral parliament(Horiuchi et al., 2016). Further, the increasing influence of mass media has changed the opportunities for candidates to communicate with voters. This trajectory of change has been in the direction of focusing the public’s attention on candidate profiles and personalities, above and beyond their policy platforms (Lau & Redlawsk, 2006 as cited in McAllister, 2016). It also enabled candidates to rely 250 Vol. 12 No. 3 November 2021 251 less on their party affiliation for support and more on their per- sonal appeals and images conveyed through the electronic me- dia (McAllister, 2016). Also, (Biswas et al., 2014) found that news and other relevant contents in social media about certain candi - dates posed a significant influence to the voters in assessing the personal qualities of the candidates. This study hypothesizes that: H3: Candidate orientation is associated with the respondents’ voting preferences. PRE-ELECTION SURVEYS AND VOTING Pre-election polls typically survey a random sample of eligible or likely voters, and then generate population-level estimates by taking a weighted average of responses, where the weights are designed to correct for known differences between sample and population (Voss et. al, 1995 as cited in Mehr et al., 2016). (Blais et al., 2002) noted that polls have an impact on expectations about the outcome of the election, and is potentially important for understanding how voters decide which candidates and par - ties to vote for in elections. Given that people tend to favor and conform to strong groups, one of the best metrics for deciding which political groups are gaining in strength are election polls (Dahlgaard et al., 2017). The work of (Blais et al., 2002) argues for the influence of pre- election surveys to the voting preferences of the voters. They used the concepts “strategic vote” and the “contagion effect” to ex- plain the association of voter’s voting decisions and election polls. Strategic voting refers to the voters’ preference for a party or can - didate that shows a positive standing in the election race (through pre-election poll), even if it is not personally motivated by the intention to affect the election outcome. Contagion effect takes a similar action with the latter; however, it assumes that voters evaluate leading candidates in pre-election polls and have posi- tive outlook on them over those lagging behind on the assump- tion that these candidates perform better than other candidates JURNAL STUDI PEMERINTAHAN simply because people rated the candidate better than others (Blais et al., 2002). Another factor is the “underdog effect” of pre-election polls on voting. This refers to the tendency for voters to be attracted to the trailing candidates in the pre-election polls (Michniewicz and Vandello, 2013). (Dahlgaard et al, 2017) described this as “sympathy votes” from the electorate to parties or candidates that are set to decline in a poll. Similarly, recent studies have explored the importance of how polls influence vote choice with causal designs and in new contexts. These studies all confirm “band- wagon effects” in the Netherlands, France, Austria, Germany, and Denmark (Dahlgaard et al., 2017; Stolwijk et al. 2016; Van der Meer et al. 2016; Morton et al. 2015; Meffert et al. 2011). The fourth hypothesis of this study is thus stated: H4: Pre-election surveys is positively associated with the re- spondents’ voting preferences. RESEARCH MODEL Figure 1 below shows the hypothesized relationships of the variables under study. The respondents’ party identification, is - sue orientation and candidate orientation, as well as pre-election surveys are posed as independent variables in determining their voting preferences in the 2019 Philippine senatorial elections (dependent variable). 252 FIGURE 1. RESEARCH MODEL SHOWING HYPOTHESIZED RELATIONSHIPS H1 Issue Orientation Voting Preferences in 2019 Senatorial Elections Candidate Orientation Pre-election Surveys Vol. 12 No. 3 November 2021 253 RESEARCH METHOD This research employed a quantitative approach in examin- ing the variables associated with the voting preferences of youth - voters in the 2019 Senatorial Election. The research population is the youth voters of Iligan City, Philippines. A total of 210 re- spondents (N=210) were selected using purposive sampling, due to time and financial constraints. Survey research method was utilized for gathering of data from the respondents. The respon - dents were asked to state their level of agreement with the indi- cators of the constructs on a ûve-point Likert scale. Data were analyzed quantitatively through structural equation modeling, path analysis and confirmatory factor analysis statistical tools. Before the actual gathering of data, the survey questionnaire was subjected to a pilot-testing. This was necessary to assess the reliability and validity of the constructs which is determined by the coefficient of Cronbach’s alpha. According to (Nunally, 1978), the minimum Cronbach’s alpha values should be greater than 0.70 to indicate reliability of the instrument. Presented below in Table 1 is the result of the reliability analysis for the pilot-test which was administered to selected thirty (30) respondents. TABLE 1. PILOT-TEST RELIABILITY ANALYSIS OF CONSTRUCTS (N=30) Construct Number of Items Cronbach’s alpha α Reliability Type Party Identification 4 .864 High Issue Orientation 4 .956 High Candidate Orientation 4 .914 High Pre-election Surveys 4 .797 High Voting Preference 7 .785 High The result shows that the constructs are reliable and valid given that the Cronbach’s alpha values exceed the minimum. After the questionnaire was finalized, actual gathering of data was conducted. JURNAL STUDI PEMERINTAHAN RESULT This part presents the results of analysis of the data collected from the study sample. Quantitative analysis was done through a licensed version of IBM SPSS (version 20) and IBM SPSS AMOS (version 25). TABLE 2. MEAN AND STANDARD DEVIATION FOR ITEMS IN THE MODEL (N=210) Constructs Item Mean SD Party Identification PI1 3.1524 1.18427 PI2 2.8571 1.16100 PI3 2.6762 1.03522 PI4 2.4952 1.03641 Issue Orientation IO1 4.4667 .67868 IO2 4.3810 .67606 IO3 4.4524 .67073 IO4 4.7571 3.55720 Candidate Orientation CO1 4.2048 .85894 CO2 3.6571 1.02904 CO3 4.2333 .82301 CO4 4.1762 .96464 Pre-Election Surveys PES1 3.6190 1.07944 PES2 3.5238 1.04075 PES3 3.3000 .96865 PES4 2.6667 .87678 Voting Preferences VP1 3.2381 1.14936 VP2 3.0524 .89235 VP3 3.4095 .98501 VP4 4.3286 .75877 VP5 2.2954 .99206 VP6 2.8619 .89388 VP7 2.5381 .87549 DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS Indicated in Table 2 above are the mean and standard devia- tion (SD) of the items or indicators for the constructs in the research model. Mean values for party identification (PI), pre- election surveys (PES), and voting preferences (VP), except for VP4, as well as item CO2 for candidate orientation (CO), were above two, which suggests that there is a general disagreement on the indicators. The mean values for issue orientation (IO) and candidate orientation (except for CO2) were higher than four, indicating a general positive response on the indicators. 254 Vol. 12 No. 3 November 2021 255 However, this does not mean that other indicator statements did not receive positive responses since it only shows the multileveled nature of response coming from the respondents. The standard deviation for the construct items ranges from .6703 to 3.5572. RELIABILITY AND VALIDITY ANALYSIS The findings in Table 3 below show the results of the reliabil - ity analysis applying Cronbach’s alpha, which signifies the inter- nal consistency of indicator items that measure the same con- struct. (Nunnally, 1978) considers a minimum Cronbach’s alpha value of 0.70 to indicate reliability and validity of constructs. As reported below, the alpha values of the constructs range from .720 to .953, which means that all constructs have shown high reliability level. TABLE 3. RELIABILITY ANALYSIS OF CONSTRUCTS (N=210) Construct Number of Items Cronbach’s alpha α Reliability Type Party Identification 4 .865 High Issue Orientation 4 .953 High Candidate Orientation 4 .913 High Pre-election Surveys 4 .815 High Voting Preference 7 .720 High The covariance estimates between pairs of variables in the model determines the discriminant validity of the variables (Anderson and Gerbing, 1988). The square root of the average variance extracted should be greater than the covariance between a pair of variables to indicate that a variable is different from other variables (Barclay and Smith, 1997). For example, the co- variance between PES and CO is 1.761, which is less than the square root of average variance extracted for PES (10.126) and CO (7.169). In other words, PES is different from CO, hence, there is a discriminant validity between both variables. As shown in Table 4, all variables of the model passed this test. JURNAL STUDI PEMERINTAHAN TABLE 4. COVARIANCES OF VARIABLES Variable PES CO IO PI VP PES 10.126 CO 1.761 7.169 IO 1.418 1.904 18.025 PI 4.794 1.699 .966 13.872 VP 4.659 .708 1.125 4.745 16.133 STRUCTURAL MODEL TEST Table 5 below summarizes the model fit test. The structural model fit was tested by calculating model fit estimates by means of AMOS and reporting the following fit indices: incremental fit index [IFI (Bollen, 1989)]; comparative fit index [CFI (Bentler, 1990)]; goodness-of-fit-index [GFI (Arbuckle, 2016)]; and the root mean square residual [RMR (Arbuckle, 2016)]. Results show that the model values have exceed the recommended values, which means that the research model passed all fit indices. TABLE 5. MODEL FIT RESULTS Index Recommended value Model Value Incremental fit index (IFI) ≥0.900 1.000 Comparative fit index (CFI) ≥0.900 1.000 Goodness-of-fit index (GFI) ≥0.950 1.000 Root mean square residual (RMR) ≤0.04 .000 HYPOTHESIS TESTING: THE INDEPENDENT AND DEPEN- DENT VARIABLES In assessing the relationship between hypothetical constructs, path coefficients or regression weights should exceed .100 to ac- count for a certain impact within the structural model (Urbach & Ahlemann, 2010). Furthermore, path coefficients or regres- sion weights, either positive (in the expected direction) or nega- tive, should be significant at least at the 0.05 level (Urbach and Ahlemann, 2010; Henseler et al., 2009). The coefficient of de- termination (R²) values of approximately 0.67, 0.33, and 0.19 are considered as substantial, moderate and weak, respectively, 256 Vol. 12 No. 3 November 2021 257 in terms of the level of explanatory power (Chin, 1998). Table 6 below presents this analysis. TABLE 6. REGRESSION WEIGHTS AND HYPOTHESIS TESTING Relationship Standard Regression Weight Hypothesis Supported? Significance (p) PI VP .210 Yes <0.001 IO VP .030 No ns CO VP -.034 No ns PES VP .291 Yes <0.001 R2 (VP) .93 Legend: ns = not significant Findings shown above reveal that the independent variables party identification (PI) and pre-election surveys (PES) had im- pact on voting preference (VP), with regression weight values of .210 and .291, respectively. These are significant at less than 0.001. These findings supported the hypotheses that party identifica- tion and pre-election surveys are positively associated with vot- ing preference. The regression weight value for issue orientation (IO) did not exceed .100, which means that it is less associated with VP. Can- didate orientation (CO) is revealed to be the least associated with VP given that it had negative regression weight value. This does not mean however that IO and CO do not impact the depen- dent variable, but suggests that PI and PES had more impact compared to the two aforementioned variables. TABLE 7. SUMMARY OF HYPOTHESES TESTING RESULTS HYPOTHESIS RESULT H1 Party identification is positively associated with the respondents’ voting preferences H2 Issue orientation is positively associated with the respondent’s voting preferences. H3 Candidate orientation is positively associated with the respondent’s voting preferences. H4 Pre-election survey is positively associated with the respondent’s voting preferences. Accepted Rejected Rejected Accepted JURNAL STUDI PEMERINTAHAN The result on the R2 value of VP, which is .93, suggests that the independent variables account for about 93% of the vari- ance in VP. In other words, the independent variables in the model can substantially explain 93% of the VP, and the remain - ing 7% can be explained by other variables. Table 7 shows the summary of hypotheses testing for the asso- ciations between the independent variables and the dependent variable. The hypotheses that issue orientation (IO) and candi- date orientation (CO) are positively associated with voting pref - erence are rejected because the standard regression weights did not reach the required value, which is .100. On the other hand, the hypotheses that party identification (PI) and pre-election sur- veys (PES) are positively associated with voting preference are accepted because the regression weight values exceed the required value of .100, and both have very high significance levels, which are at <0.001. Thus, the study shows that party identification and pre-election surveys are determinant factors for the youth- voters’ voting preference in the 2019 senatorial election. DISCUSSION This research analyzed the extent to which party identifica- tion, issue orientation, candidate orientation, and preelection surveys are associated with the youth-voters’ voting preference in the 2019 Philippine senatorial election. Results of the study sup - ported the hypotheses that party identification and preelection surveys are positively associated with the voting preferences of the respondents, while issue orientation and candidate orienta- tion appear to have insignificant impact on voting preference. In relation to the theories applied in the study, this finding supports only one of the assumptions of Fishbein and Combs (1975) that an individual’s decision to vote for a candidate can be based on the latter’s affiliation to a political party. This also supports the contentions of other scholars who claimed that party identification is a pivotal factor in an individual’s voting choice (Garzia and Viotti, 2013; Liu, 2007; Lachat, 2006; Yu, 2004; Aiba, 258 Vol. 12 No. 3 November 2021 259 2002; Ranney, 1999; Miller, 1991; Meier, 1975; Campbell et.al, 1954). Pre-election survey also has significant influence to the vot- ing preference of the voters in the 2019 senatorial election. This supports the work of (Blais et.al, 2002) which argues that pre- election surveys are influential to the voting preferences of vot - ers. The findings also show that candidates who have positive standing in pre-election surveys are more preferable compared to those who do not perform well. This corroborates the conten - tions of other scholars about the contagion or bandwagon effect of pre-election surveys (Donsbach, 2001; Marsh, 1985; Simon, 1954;). Meanwhile, the finding that candidate orientation is least as- sociated with voting preferences refutes the claims of previous studies which reject candidates’ party affiliation and rather ex- plain candidate-centered factors as pivotal determinant in explain- ing the voting preferences of the Filipinos (Murcia and Bolo, 2016; Calda, 2016; David and Legara, 2015; Gallardo, 2015; Centeno, 2010; Ufen, 2008). Looking into the Philippine electoral environment at present, it can be construed that the preference is based on the candidate’s affiliation with pro-administration or opposition parties. More- over, pre-election surveys are influential to the youth-voters’ pref- erence. This is apparently associated to the fact that results of preelection surveys are regularly available to the public especially that they have been mainstreamed in all media outlets, especially in social media, and have been regularly conducted and pub- lished within the campaign period. Thus, they could potentially create a bandwagon effect towards the voters. On the whole, the outcome of the study has departed from the prevailing electoral trend, as can be found in the existing literature, where Filipino voting preference is explained by candidate personality-centered factors. JURNAL STUDI PEMERINTAHAN CONCLUSION In the context of this study’s findings, the candidate’s politi - cal alignment to a political party or parties that is/are supportive of an administration which is gaining popular support from the majority is favored by youth voters. The candidates’ secure posi- tive standing in pre-election surveys is likewise preferred. Need- less to say, a candidate’s stand or position on key issues of the country as well as their personal background are also important because the electorate is also composed of non-youth voters. While it is important to look into the candidate’s party affili - ation and status in pre-election surveys in voting, these factors do not guarantee a candidate’s winnability in an election, nor do these ensure competence and ability in the performance of du- ties and functions. On the part of the voters, it is equally impor - tant to apply an issue-based choice and evaluate candidate’s quali- ties and background during elections. REFERENCES Aardal, B. (2005). Issue voting. The European Voter, 28(3), 192-206. doi:10.1093/ 0199273219.003.0008 Adams, S., & Agomor, K. (2015). Democratic politics and voting behavior in Ghana. - International Area Studies Review, 18(4), 365-381. doi:10.1177/2233865915587865 Aiba, J. (2002). Reviewing theories of voting behavior. Retrieved from http:// rep o .na rau. a c. j p/mo du le s/xo on i p s/d o w nlo ad .p h p/A N 00 1 8 15 6 9- 2 0 03 03 00- 1017.pdf?file_id=2035 Anderson, J. C., & Gerbing, D. W. (1988). Structural equation modeling in practice: a review and recommended two-step approach. Psychological Bulletin, 103(3) Ando, H. (1969). A study of voting patterns in the Philippine presidential and senatorial elections, 1946-1965. Midwest Journal of Political Science, 13(4), 567-586. doi:10.2307/2110072\ Aragones, E., & Palfrey, T. (2004). The effect of candidate quality on electoral equilib- rium: An experimental study. The American Political Science Review, 98(3), 77-90. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003055404001017 Arbuckle, J. L. (2016). IBM SPSS Amos 24 User’s Guide. (USA: IBM Corp. and A m o s Development Corp.) Baker, A., & Greene, K. (2015). Positional issue voting in Latin America. Retrieved from https://www.colorado.edu/faculty/baker/sites/default/files/attached -files/ baker_and_greene_lav_website.pdf Banerjee, A., & Pande, R. (2008). Parochial politics: Ethnic preferences and politician corruption. Retrieved from https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=- 1136706 Barclay, D. W., & Smith, J. B. (1997). The effects of organizational differences and trust on the effectiveness of selling partner relationships. Journal of Marketing , 260 https://oxford.universitypressscholarship.com/view/10.1093/0199273219.001.0001/acprof-9780199273218 https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/2233865915587865 https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/2233865915587865 http://repo.nara-u.ac.jp/modules/xoonips/download.php/AN00181569-20030300-1017.pdf?file_id=2035 https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1989-14190-001 https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1989-14190-001 https://www.jstor.org/stable/2110072 https://www.jstor.org/stable/2110072 https://www.researchgate.net/publication/4983403_The_Effect_of_Candidate_Quality_on_Electoral_Equilibrium_An_Experimental_Study https://www.researchgate.net/publication/4983403_The_Effect_of_Candidate_Quality_on_Electoral_Equilibrium_An_Experimental_Study http://www.csun.edu/itr/downloads/docs/IBM_SPSS_Amos_User_GuideV24.pdf http://www.csun.edu/itr/downloads/docs/IBM_SPSS_Amos_User_GuideV24.pdf https://www.colorado.edu/faculty/baker/sites/default/files/attached-files/%20baker_and_greene_lav_website.pdf http://www.colorado.edu/faculty/baker/sites/default/files/attached-files/ https://economics.mit.edu/files/3872 https://economics.mit.edu/files/3872 https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1997-02427-001 https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1997-02427-001 Vol. 12 No. 3 November 2021 61(1). 3–21. Belanger, E., & Meguids, B. (2008). Issue salience, issue ownership and issue-based vote choice: Evidence from Canada. Electoral Studies, 27(2), 477-491. doi:10.1016/ j.electstud.2008.01.001 Bentler, P. M. (1990). Comparative fit indexes in structural models. Psychological Bul- letin, 107. 238–246. Biswas, A., Ingle, N., & Roy, M. (2014). Influence of social media on voting behavior. Retrieved from http://jppgnet.com/journals/jppg/Vol_2_No_2_June_2014/7.pdf Blais, A., Gidengil, E., & Nevitte, N. (2002). Do polls influence the vote. Retrieved from https://www.press.umich.edu/pdf/0472099213-ch11.pdf Bollen, K. A. (1989). A new incremental fit index for general structural equationmodels. Sociological Methods and Research, 17. 303–316. Byrne, G. C., & Peuschel, J. K. (1974). But who shall I vote for county coroner? Journal of Politics, 36, 778–784. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/ 2129255 Calda, D. (2016). The voting preferences of selected voters in the city of Calapan for 2016 national and local elections: a descriptive study. Retrieved from http:// www.academia.edu/25598774/THE_VOTING_PREFERENCES_OF_SELECTED_- VOTERS_IN_THE_CITY_OF_CALAPAN_FOR_2016_NATIONAL_AND_LOCAL- _ELECTIONS_A_DESCRIPTIVE_STUDY Campbell, A., Gurin, D. and Miller, W.E. (1954). The voter decides. The American Political Science Review, 49, 225-228. doi: 10.2307/1951650 Centeno, D. (2010). Celebrification in Philippine politics: Exploring the relationship be- tween celebrity endorser’s parasociability and the public’s voting behavior [Abstract]. Social Science Diliman, 6 (5), 66-75. Retrieved from http:// journaldatabase.info/articles/celebrification_philippine_politics_exploring.html Chin, W. (1998). The partial least squares approach to structural equation modeling. In G. A. Marcoulides (Ed.), Modern Methods for Business Research (pp. 295-358). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Cutler, F. (2002). The simplest shortcut of all: Sociodemographic characteristics and electoral Choice. The Journal of Politics, 64(2), 466-490. Retrieved from http:// www.jstor.org/stable/2691857 Dahlgaard, J., Hansen, J., Hansen, K., & Larsen, M. (2017). How election polls shape voting behavior. Scandinavian Political Studies, 40(5), 330-343. Retrieved from https:/ /doi.org/10.1111/1467-9477.12094 David, C., & Legara, E. (2015). How voters combine candidates on the ballot: The case of the Philippine senatorial elections. International Journal of Public Opinion Re- search, 29(3), 70-94. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1093/ijpor/edv041 Donsbach, W. (2001). Who’s afraid of election polls? Normative and empirical arguments for the freedom of pre-election surveys. Retrieved from https://wapor.org/wp-con- tent/uploads/who-is-afraid-of-opinion-polls.pdf Fishbein, M., & Coombs, F. S. (1974). Basis for decision: An attitudinal analysis of voting behavior. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 4(2), 95-124. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/ j.1559-1816.1974.tb00662.x Gallardo, R. (2015). The Filipino vote. Retrieved from http://www.academia.edu/19545321/ The_Filipino_Vote Garzia, D., & Viotti, F. (2012). Party identiûcation, leader effects and vote choice in Italy, 1990-2008. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/ 270267583_Party_Identification_Leader_Effects_and_Vote_Choice_in_Italy_1990- 2008 Green, A. (2002). Partisan hearts and minds: Political parties and the social identities of voters. Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt1npp6m Green, J., & Hobolt, S. (2008). Owning the issue agenda: Party strategies and vote choices 261 https://www.researchgate.net/publication/222821540_Issue_salience_issue_ownership_and_issue-based_vote_choice https://www.researchgate.net/publication/222821540_Issue_salience_issue_ownership_and_issue-based_vote_choice https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1990-13755-001 http://jppgnet.com/journals/jppg/Vol_2_No_2_June_2014/7.pdf http://jppgnet.com/journals/jppg/Vol_2_No_2_June_2014/7.pdf https://www.press.umich.edu/pdf/0472099213-ch11.pdf http://www.press.umich.edu/pdf/0472099213-ch11.pdf http://www.press.umich.edu/pdf/0472099213-ch11.pdf https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0049124189017003004 https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0049124189017003004 https://www.google.com/search?q=But%2Bwho%2Bshall%2BI%2Bvote%2Bfor%2Bcounty%2Bcoroner%3F%2BJournal%2Bof%2BPolitics%2C%2B36%2C%2B778%E2%80%93784&oq=But%2Bwho%2Bshall%2BI%2Bvote%2Bfor%2Bcounty%2Bcoroner%3F%2BJournal%2Bof%2BPolitics%2C%2B36%2C%2B778%E2%80%93784&aqs=chrome..69i57.669j0j4&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8 https://www.google.com/search?q=But%2Bwho%2Bshall%2BI%2Bvote%2Bfor%2Bcounty%2Bcoroner%3F%2BJournal%2Bof%2BPolitics%2C%2B36%2C%2B778%E2%80%93784&oq=But%2Bwho%2Bshall%2BI%2Bvote%2Bfor%2Bcounty%2Bcoroner%3F%2BJournal%2Bof%2BPolitics%2C%2B36%2C%2B778%E2%80%93784&aqs=chrome..69i57.669j0j4&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8 http://www.jstor.org/stable/ https://www.academia.edu/25598774/THE_VOTING_PREFERENCES_OF_SELECTED_VOTERS_IN_THE_CITY_OF_CALAPAN_FOR_2016_NATIONAL_AND_LOCAL_ELECTIONS_A_DESCRIPTIVE_STUDY https://www.academia.edu/25598774/THE_VOTING_PREFERENCES_OF_SELECTED_VOTERS_IN_THE_CITY_OF_CALAPAN_FOR_2016_NATIONAL_AND_LOCAL_ELECTIONS_A_DESCRIPTIVE_STUDY http://www.academia.edu/25598774/THE_VOTING_PREFERENCES_OF_SELECTED_- https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/american-political-science-review/article/abs/voter-decides-by-angus-campbell-gerald-gurin-and-warren-e-miller-evanston-ill-row-peterson-and-co1954-pp-xiii-242-475/BB25E32717A49D3E642A7BC8B89729D8 https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/american-political-science-review/article/abs/voter-decides-by-angus-campbell-gerald-gurin-and-warren-e-miller-evanston-ill-row-peterson-and-co1954-pp-xiii-242-475/BB25E32717A49D3E642A7BC8B89729D8 https://doaj.org/article/cd54c71bc66d4d22acdb3320b53e9876 https://doaj.org/article/cd54c71bc66d4d22acdb3320b53e9876 https://doaj.org/article/cd54c71bc66d4d22acdb3320b53e9876 https://www.jstor.org/stable/2691857 https://www.jstor.org/stable/2691857 http://www.jstor.org/stable/2691857 https://www.google.com/search?q=How%2Belection%2Bpolls%2Bshape%2Bvoting%2Bbehavior.%2BScandinavian%2BPolitical%2BStudies%2C%2B40(5)%2C%2B330-343&oq=How%2Belection%2Bpolls%2Bshape%2Bvoting%2Bbehavior.%2BScandinavian%2BPolitical%2BStudies%2C%2B40(5)%2C%2B330-343&aqs=chrome..69i57.675j0j4&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8 https://www.google.com/search?q=How%2Belection%2Bpolls%2Bshape%2Bvoting%2Bbehavior.%2BScandinavian%2BPolitical%2BStudies%2C%2B40(5)%2C%2B330-343&oq=How%2Belection%2Bpolls%2Bshape%2Bvoting%2Bbehavior.%2BScandinavian%2BPolitical%2BStudies%2C%2B40(5)%2C%2B330-343&aqs=chrome..69i57.675j0j4&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8 https://academic.oup.com/ijpor/article/29/1/70/2981864 https://academic.oup.com/ijpor/article/29/1/70/2981864 https://wapor.org/wp-content/uploads/who-is-afraid-of-opinion-polls.pdf https://wapor.org/wp-content/uploads/who-is-afraid-of-opinion-polls.pdf https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1975-02942-001 https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1975-02942-001 https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1975-02942-001 https://www.academia.edu/19545321/The_Filipino_Vote http://www.academia.edu/19545321/ https://cadmus.eui.eu/handle/1814/23836 https://cadmus.eui.eu/handle/1814/23836 http://www.researchgate.net/publication/ http://www.uvm.edu/~dguber/POLS125/articles/green.pdf http://www.uvm.edu/~dguber/POLS125/articles/green.pdf http://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt1npp6m https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0261379408000255 JURNAL STUDI PEMERINTAHAN in British elections. Electoral Studies, 27, 460-476. doi:10.1016/j.electstud.2008.02.003 Hazarika, B. (2015). Voting behavior in India and its determinants. Retrieved from http:// www.iosrjournals.org/iosr-jhss/papers/Vol20-issue10/Version-4/E0201042225.pdf Hardy, B. (2014). Candidate traits and political choice. Retrieved from http:// www.oxfordhandbooks.com/view/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199793471.001.0001/ oxfordhb-9780199793471-e-017 Henseler, J., Ringle, C. & Sinkovics, R. (2009). The use of partial least squares path modeling in international marketing. Advances in International Marketing 20. 277- 320 Horiuchi, Y., Smith, D., & Yamamoto, T. (2016). Identifying voter preferences for politi- cians’ personal attributes: A conjoint experiment in Japan. Retrieved from https:// rubenson.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/Horiuchi-Smith-Yamamoto.pdf Hossain, K., Islam, S., & Aktar, M. (2017). People’s voting behavior in local election: A study on Annadanagar Union Parishad, Pirgachha, Rangpur. IOSR Journal of Hu- manities and Social Science, 22, 1-14. doi:10.9790/0837-2203010114 Kinder, D. & Abelson, R. (1981). Presidential prototypes [Abstract]. Political Behavior, 02(3), 315-337. Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org/stable/586418 Kittilson, M. (2016). Gender and political behavior. Retrieved from http:// politics.oxfordre.com/view/10.1093/acrefore/9780190228637.001.0001/acrefore- 9780190228637-e-71 Klein, D., & Baum, L. (2001). Ballot information and voting decisions in judicial elections. Political Research Quarterly, 54, 709–728. Retrieved from http://www. jstor.org/- stable/449231 Kriesi, H., & Sciarini, P. (2004). The Impact of Issue Preferences on Voting Choices in the Swiss Federal Elections, 1999. British Journal of Political Science, 04, 725-747. DOI: 10.1017/S0007123404210262 Lachat, R. (2006). Party identification, electoral utilities, and voting choice. Retrieved from http://www.romain-lachat.ch/papers/ecpr2006.pdf Lau, R. and Redlawsk, D. (2001). Advantages and disadvantages of cognitive heuristics in political decision making [Abstract]. American Journal of Political Science, 45:4, 951–971. Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org/stable/2669334 Lawrence, D. (1978). Candidate orientation, vote choice, & the quality of the American electorate. Polity, 11, 229-246. doi:10.2307/3234444 Lee, D. (2001). The electoral advantage to incumbency and voters’ valuation of politi- cians’ experience: A regression discontinuity analysis of close elections. Retrieved from http://cle.berkeley.edu/wp/wp31.pdf Lenz, G. (2012). Follow the Leader? How Voters Respond to Politicians’ Policies and Performance. Public Opinion Quarterly, 77, 637-640. Retrieved from https://doi.org/ 10.1093/poq/nft014 Liu, N. (2007). Party identification, candidate evaluation, and voting in Taiwan’s presi- dential elections, 1996-2004. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publi- cation/228961408_Party_Identification_Candidate_Evaluation_and_Voting_in- _Taiwan’s_Presidential_Elections_1996-2004 Markel, D. (2010). Out and running: Gay and lesbian candidates, elections, and policy representation. Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt2tt34x Marsh, C. (1985). Back on the bandwagon: The effect of opinion polls on public opinion [Abstract]. British Journal of Political Science, 15, 51-74. Retrieved from https:// www.jstor.org/stable/193747 McAllister, I. (2016). Candidates and Voting Choice. Retrieved from http://politics.oxford- re.com/view/10.1093/acrefore/9780190228637.001.0001/acrefore-9780190228637- e-73?print=pdf Meffert, M., Gschwend, T., Huber, S., & Pappi, F. (2011). More than wishful thinking: causes 262 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0261379408000255 https://www.iosrjournals.org/iosr-jhss/papers/Vol20-issue10/Version-4/E0201042225.pdf http://www.iosrjournals.org/iosr-jhss/papers/Vol20-issue10/Version-4/E0201042225.pdf https://www.oxfordhandbooks.com/view/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199793471.001.0001/oxfordhb-9780199793471-e-017 http://www.oxfordhandbooks.com/view/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199793471.001.0001/ https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/S1474-7979(2009)0000020014/full/html https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/S1474-7979(2009)0000020014/full/html https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/political-science-research-and-methods/article/abs/identifying-voter-preferences-for-politicians-personal-attributes-a-conjoint-experiment-in-japan/95ADB2B43C5289ECFE6898B7FE776CFE https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/political-science-research-and-methods/article/abs/identifying-voter-preferences-for-politicians-personal-attributes-a-conjoint-experiment-in-japan/95ADB2B43C5289ECFE6898B7FE776CFE https://www.iosrjournals.org/iosr-jhss/papers/Vol.%2022%20Issue3/Version-1/A2203010114.pdf https://www.iosrjournals.org/iosr-jhss/papers/Vol.%2022%20Issue3/Version-1/A2203010114.pdf https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/BF00990172 https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/BF00990172 http://www.jstor.org/stable/586418 https://nimd.org/programmes/gender/?gclid=CjwKCAiAs92MBhAXEiwAXTi25zYTancJABR7bNZ6KA5PvN2en-ZvaG93Dl82xUF3IFcgzzu3WylKXxoCVyMQAvD_BwE https://www.jstor.org/stable/449231 https://www.jstor.org/stable/449231 http://www/ https://www.jstor.org/stable/449231 https://www.jstor.org/stable/449231 http://www.romain-lachat.ch/papers/ecpr2006.pdf http://www.romain-lachat.ch/papers/ecpr2006.pdf https://www.jstor.org/stable/2669334 https://www.jstor.org/stable/2669334 http://www.jstor.org/stable/2669334 https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/abs/10.2307/3234444 https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/abs/10.2307/3234444 http://cle.berkeley.edu/wp/wp31.pdf http://cle.berkeley.edu/wp/wp31.pdf http://cle.berkeley.edu/wp/wp31.pdf https://press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/chicago/F/bo11644533.html https://press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/chicago/F/bo11644533.html https://library.oapen.org/bitstream/id/1c115cc3-4acf-41a8-9d0d-f467bec40dd7/1006087.pdf https://library.oapen.org/bitstream/id/1c115cc3-4acf-41a8-9d0d-f467bec40dd7/1006087.pdf http://www.researchgate.net/publi- https://www.amazon.com/Out-Running-Candidates-Representation-Government/dp/1589016998 https://www.amazon.com/Out-Running-Candidates-Representation-Government/dp/1589016998 http://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt2tt34x https://econpapers.repec.org/article/cupbjposi/v_3a15_3ay_3a1985_3ai_3a01_3ap_3a51-74_5f00.htm https://econpapers.repec.org/article/cupbjposi/v_3a15_3ay_3a1985_3ai_3a01_3ap_3a51-74_5f00.htm http://www.jstor.org/stable/193747 https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/2056305119826130 http://politics.oxford-/ https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228460619_More_Than_Wishful_Thinking_Causes_and_Consequences_of_Voters%27_Electoral_Expectations_About_Parties_and_Coalitions Vol. 12 No. 3 November 2021 and consequences of voters’ electoral expectations about parties and coalitions. Retrieved f ro m h ttp s://w w w. researc h gate.net/p ublicati on/2284606 1 9_ More_ - Than_Wishful_Thinking_Causes_and_Consequences_of_Voters’_Electoral_Expec- tations_About_Parties_and_Coalitions Mehr, H., Rothschild, D., Goel, S., & Gelman, A. (2018). Disentangling bias and variance in election polls. Retrieved from https://5harad.com/papers/polling-errors.pdf Meier, K. (1975). Party identification and vote choice: The causal relationship. The West- ern Political Quarterly, 28, 496-505. doi:10.2307/447369 Michniewicz, K., & Vandello, J. (2013). The attractive underdog: When disadvantage bolsters attractiveness. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 30, 942-952. doi:10.1177/0265407513477629 Miller, W. (1991). Party identification realignment and party voting: Back to the basics. The American Political Science Review, 85, 557-568. doi:10.2307/1963175 Miller, W., & Shanks, M. (1996). The new American voter. Presidential Studies Quarterly, 27, 383-386. Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org/stable/27551745 Murcia, J., & Bolo, R. (2017). Millennial voters’ preference for the 2016 Philippine presi- dential elections: A simulation using conjoint analysis. Retrieved from https:// w w w.resea rchgate .net/pu blicati on/3 175947 83_ Mille nni al_Vote rs’_P ref erence - _for_the_2016_Philippine_Presidential_Elections_A_Simulation_Using_Conjoint- _Analysis Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric Theory. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill. Patinio, F. (2018). Statistics of youth voters in the Philippines. Retrieved from statistics of youth voters in the philippines (bingj.com) Pertierra, R. (1988). Religion, politics, and rationality in a Philippine community. Manila, Philippines: Ateneo de Manila University Press Pitkin, H. (1972). The concept of representation. Retrieved from https://www.ucpress.edu/ book/9780520021563/the-concept-of-representation Popkin, S. (1994). The reasoning voter: Communication and persuasion in presidential campaigns. Contemporary Sociology, 21, 26-46. doi:10.2307/2075855 Ranney, A. (1999). Governing: An introduction to political science (7th ed.). Singapore: Prentice-Hall, Inc. Rosenberg, S., Bohan, L., McCafferty, P. and Harris, K. (1986). The image and the vote: The effect of candidate presentation on voter preference [Abstract]. American Jour- nal of Political Science, 30:1, 108–127. Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org/stable/ 2111296 Roskin, M., Cord, R., Medeiros, J., & Jones, W. (1997). Political Science: An introduction (6th ed.). New Jersey, USA: Prentice-Hall. Sarlamanov, K. and Jovanoski, A. (2014). Models of voting. Retrieved from https:// www.researchgate.net/publication/308918563_MODELS_OF_VOTING Simon, H. (1954). Bandwagon and underdog effects and the possibility of election pre- dictions [Abstract]. The Public Opinion Quarterly, 18, 245-253. Retrieved from https:/ /www.jstor.org/stable/2745982. Social Weather Station. (2007). Attitudes towards political parties in the Philippines. Retrieved from https://www.kas.de/c/document_library/get_file?uuid=23203435- 2db4-47da-0e59-ffa1efc041fb&groupId=252038 Stolwijk, S., Schuck, A., & De Vreese, C. (2016). How anxiety and enthusiasm help ex- plain the bandwagon effect [Abstract]. International Journal of Public Opinion Re- search, 29, 554-574. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1093/ijpor/edw018 Ufen, A. (2008). Political party and party system institutionalization in Southeast Asia: Lessons for democratic consolidation in Indonesia, the Philippines and Thailand. The Pacific Review, 21, 327- 350. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1080/ 09512740802134174 263 https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228460619_More_Than_Wishful_Thinking_Causes_and_Consequences_of_Voters%27_Electoral_Expectations_About_Parties_and_Coalitions https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228460619_More_Than_Wishful_Thinking_Causes_and_Consequences_of_Voters%27_Electoral_Expectations_About_Parties_and_Coalitions http://www.researchgate.net/publication/228460619_More_- http://www.stat.columbia.edu/~gelman/research/published/polling-errors.pdf http://www.stat.columbia.edu/~gelman/research/published/polling-errors.pdf https://ur.booksc.eu/book/53267623/c6f480 https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0265407513477629 https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0265407513477629 https://www.jstor.org/stable/1963175 https://www.jstor.org/stable/1963175 https://www.amazon.com/New-American-Voter-Warren-Miller/dp/0674608410 https://www.amazon.com/New-American-Voter-Warren-Miller/dp/0674608410 http://www.jstor.org/stable/27551745 https://www.scribd.com/document/491939846/Millennial-Voters-Preference-for-the-2016-Philippine-Presidential-Elections-A-Simulation-Using-Conjoint-Analysis-Murcia-and-Bolo https://www.scribd.com/document/491939846/Millennial-Voters-Preference-for-the-2016-Philippine-Presidential-Elections-A-Simulation-Using-Conjoint-Analysis-Murcia-and-Bolo http://www.researchgate.net/publication/317594783_Millennial_Voters https://www.google.com/search?sxsrf=AOaemvLOn27-b54GiQIs-8ujx1G608WPVQ%3A1637335079929&q=Patinio%2C%2BF.%2B(2018).%2BStatistics%2Bof%2Byouth%2Bvoters%2Bin%2Bthe%2BPhilippines.%2BRetrieved%2Bfrom%2Bstatistics%2Bof%2Byouth%2Bvoters%2Bin%2Bthe%2Bphilippines%2B(bing.com)&spell=1&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiwwsS-3KT0AhUqxTgGHcjaB-MQBSgAegQIARAx&cshid=1637335109218704&biw=1422&bih=641&dpr=1.35 https://www.google.com/search?sxsrf=AOaemvLOn27-b54GiQIs-8ujx1G608WPVQ%3A1637335079929&q=Patinio%2C%2BF.%2B(2018).%2BStatistics%2Bof%2Byouth%2Bvoters%2Bin%2Bthe%2BPhilippines.%2BRetrieved%2Bfrom%2Bstatistics%2Bof%2Byouth%2Bvoters%2Bin%2Bthe%2Bphilippines%2B(bing.com)&spell=1&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiwwsS-3KT0AhUqxTgGHcjaB-MQBSgAegQIARAx&cshid=1637335109218704&biw=1422&bih=641&dpr=1.35 http://www.ateneo.edu/ateneopress/product/religion-politics-and-rationality-philippine-community http://www.ateneo.edu/ateneopress/product/religion-politics-and-rationality-philippine-community https://www.ucpress.edu/book/9780520021563/the-concept-of-representation http://www.ucpress.edu/ https://www.amazon.com/Reasoning-Voter-Communication-Persuasion-Presidential/dp/0226675459 https://www.amazon.com/Reasoning-Voter-Communication-Persuasion-Presidential/dp/0226675459 https://opac.perpusnas.go.id/DetailOpac.aspx?id=22649 https://www.researchgate.net/publication/271805500_The_Image_and_the_Vote_The_Effect_of_Candidate_Presentation_on_Voter_Preference https://www.researchgate.net/publication/271805500_The_Image_and_the_Vote_The_Effect_of_Candidate_Presentation_on_Voter_Preference http://www.jstor.org/stable/ https://www.amazon.com/Political-Science-Introduction-Robert-Cord/dp/0132584352 https://www.amazon.com/Political-Science-Introduction-Robert-Cord/dp/0132584352 http://www.researchgate.net/publication/308918563_MODELS_OF_VOTING https://academic.oup.com/poq/article-abstract/18/3/245/1907955?redirectedFrom=fulltext https://academic.oup.com/poq/article-abstract/18/3/245/1907955?redirectedFrom=fulltext http://www.jstor.org/stable/2745982 http://www.jstor.org/stable/2745982 https://www.kas.de/c/document_library/get_file?uuid=23203435-2db4-47da-0e59-ffa1efc041fb&groupId=252038 http://www.kas.de/c/document_library/get_file?uuid=23203435- http://www.kas.de/c/document_library/get_file?uuid=23203435- https://www.researchgate.net/publication/312433131_How_Anxiety_and_Enthusiasm_Help_Explain_the_Bandwagon_Effect https://www.researchgate.net/publication/312433131_How_Anxiety_and_Enthusiasm_Help_Explain_the_Bandwagon_Effect https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/09512740802134174 https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/09512740802134174 JURNAL STUDI PEMERINTAHAN Urbach, N. & Ahlemann, F. (2010). Structural equation modeling in information systems research using partial least squares. Journal of Information Technology Theory and Application, 11(2). 5-40 Van der Meer, T., Hakhverdian, A., & Aaldering, L. (2016). Off the fence, onto the band- wagon? A large-scale survey experiment on effect of real-life poll outcomes on subsequent vote intentions [Abstract]. International Journal of Public Opinion Re- search, 28, 46-72. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1093/ijpor/edu041 Walgrave, S., Lefevere, J., & Tresch, A. (2017). Position, competence, and commitment. The three dimensions of issue voting. Retrieved from https://ecpr.eu/Filestore/ PaperProposal/b84237e8-d8f7-4bfa-82ff-705c8278160f.pdf Yu, C. (2004). Direction and strength of voter’s party identification in Taiwan after 2000. Retrieved from http://www2.scu.edu.tw/politics/journal/doc/j19/2.pdf 264 https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228467554_Structural_equation_modeling_in_information_systems_research_using_Partial_Least_Squares https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228467554_Structural_equation_modeling_in_information_systems_research_using_Partial_Least_Squares https://academic.oup.com/ijpor/article/28/1/46/2357273 https://academic.oup.com/ijpor/article/28/1/46/2357273 https://academic.oup.com/ijpor/article/28/1/46/2357273 https://www.researchgate.net/publication/332834265_POSITION_COMPETENCE_AND_COMMITMENT_1_Position_Competence_and_Commitment_Three_Dimensions_of_Issue_Voting https://www.researchgate.net/publication/332834265_POSITION_COMPETENCE_AND_COMMITMENT_1_Position_Competence_and_Commitment_Three_Dimensions_of_Issue_Voting https://ah.nccu.edu.tw/bitstream/140.119/24772/1/2.pdf http://www2.scu.edu.tw/politics/journal/doc/j19/2.pdf