POLITICAL BEHAVIOUR

ORUNBON Nurudeen Olalekan (NCE, B.Sc (Ed), M.Ed, Ph.D, M.Sc)

Phone Number: +2348066442494
Email: [email protected]
ORDIC ID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7479-2624

Department of Educational Management, Lagos State University,

Ojo, Nigeria

Conceptual Clarifications
Behaviour is “any observable overt movement of the organism generally taken to include verbal

behavior as well as physical movements.

Behaviour is an action, activity, or process which can be observed and measured. Often, these

actions, activities, and processes are initiated in

response to stimuli which are either internal or
external. The results of studies on these must be objective, however, in order to be reliable and
valid for scientific purposes.
According to one definition; “behavior can be defined as the actions or reactions of a person in
response to external or internal stimulus situation” To understand the behavior of a person we
have to understand what that person will do if something happens.
Behaviour is the range of actions and mannerisms made by individuals, organisms, systems or
artificial entities in conjunction with themselves or their environment, which includes the other
systems or organisms around as well as the (inanimate) physical environment. It is the computed
response of the system or organism to various stimuli or inputs, whether internal or external,
conscious or subconscious, overt or covert, and voluntary or involuntary.
Most people use the word behaviour to mean conduct. Behaviour is anything that a person does.
Behaviour is regarded as any observable activity by human being.
Behaviour can be defined as a response which is observed directly or indirectly.
Behaviour is defined as a total response of an organism in reply to living circumstances,
depending on the environmental stimulation and its internal tension of successive movements

1
which are oriented in a significant way.
Behaviour means the activity of an organism interacting with its environment.
Behaviour consists of an organism’s external reactions to its environment.
Most of human behaviour results from a combination of factors such as culture, attitudes,
emotions, values, ethics, authority, rapport, persuasion, coercion and genetics.
PRINCIPLES OF HUMAN BEHAVIOUR
1. Almost all human behaviours is learned
2. All behaviours occur for a reason
3. Behaviour continue to occur because they are effective
4. Behaviours stop occurring when they are ineffective.
FACTORS AFFECTING HUMAN BEHAVIOUR
1. Genetics – inheritance from parents
2. Social norm
3. Core faith and social culture
4. Creativity – when one leaves his/her comfort zones
5. attitude

According to one definition; “behavior can be defined as the actions or reactions of a person in
response to external or internal stimulus situation.” To understand the behavior of a person we
have to understand what that person will do if something happens.

Approving or disapproving human behavior is known as evaluating behavior. Many of us

evaluate others based on their actions and reactions to different stimuli. Behavior is mostly
influenced by the nature of the person and the nature of the situation.

Classifications of Human Behavior

Based on the way people act or behave in different situations and in response to different stimuli,
human behavior can be divided into different types. Let’s discuss below some known and
important types of human behavior.
Here are the common types of behaviors human beings can have:

2
1. Molecular and Moral Behavior
Molecular Behavior: It is an unexpected behavior that occurs without thinking. One example is
suddenly closing eyes when something is about to this the eyes.
Moral Behavior: Unlike molecular behavior, this type of behavior occurs after thinking. For
example, a person changes the way when she or he sees a harmful thing.
2. Overt & Covert Behavior
Overt Behavior: It is a visible type of behavior that can occur outside of human beings. Eating
food, riding on a bicycle, and playing football are some examples.
Covert Behavior: Unlike overt behavior, this type of behavior is not visible. Thinking is a good
example of covert behavior because no one can see us thinking.
3. Voluntary and Involuntary Behavior
Voluntary Behavior: It is a type of behavior that depends on human want. We can characterize
walking, speaking, and writing as voluntary behaviors.
Involuntary Behavior: Unlike voluntary behavior, this type occurs naturally and without
thinking. Breathing air is a perfect example of involuntary behavior.
Four (4) Popular Types of Personalities
An important research study in human behavior has classified human personality into four types
‘optimistic’, ‘pessimistic’, ‘trusting’, and ‘envious’. Unfortunately, envious is the most common
type. According to experts, more than 90% of individuals can be classified under these
categories. There seems to be some balance in different personality types.
1. Optimistic:
About 20% of the people living in this world are believed to have this personality. An optimistic
person stays hopeful in all situations and keeps trying no matter how hard circumstances get.
Furthermore, these people can be pessimistic in some situations.
2. Pessimistic
There seems to be some balance in different personality types. About 20% of people in the world
are estimated to have this personality. A pessimistic person may doubt everything around his or
her. Moreover, these people can be optimistic in some situations.

3
3. Trusting
About 20% of the people living in this world are believed to have this personality. One of the
major traits of trusting people is to trust others. These people do not need a major reason to
believe others. There are situations when these people may not trust people.
4. Envious
The number of people having this kind of personality varies from society to society. According
to research about 30% of people in the world are estimated to have this personality. Envious
people are not always like this; they can be supportive as well.
It is important to mention that a single person may become optimistic, pessimistic, envious, and
trusting. It is due to the reason that these traits exist in all human beings. The people who are
able to easily trust others are known as trusting so on and so forth.

POLITICS
The term `politics‟, is derived from the Greek word `Polis‟, which means the city state
According to Greek Philosophers, Politics was a subject which dealt with all the activities and
affairs of the city state. Their City States were known as `Polis‟. City state was an all inclusive
term, as the ancient Greeks made no distinction between the state and the Government on one
hand, and State and Society on the other. They never differentiated between personal life and
social life. Hence according to them Politics was a total study of man, society, state, morality and
so on.
The definitions of Politics includes:
1. According Harold Laswell “Politics is the study of influence and the influential” or “the study
of the shaping and sharing of power”
2. David Easton describes “Politics is the authoritative allocation of values.”
3. Catlin: “Political Science is the study of the act of human and social control”.
4. Andrew Heywood “Politics can be defined as an activity through which people make, preserve
and amend the general rules under which they live.”
Modern political scientists consider politics as a process centring around power and influence.
They are concerned with not just the state and the government, but also the study and evaluation
of political activities, political power, processes and non-governmental institutions.

4
POLITICAL BEHAVIOUR
The term refers to any form of (individual or collective) involvement in the political process, or
any activity which has political consequences in relation to government and policy. This broad
definition embraces both legitimate forms of political participation (such as voting in elections,
activism in interest groups, or social movements) and illegitimate political activities (including
coups d’état, terrorism, and revolutions/rebellions.
Political behaviour is the study of the way people think, feel, and act with regard to politics.
Political behaviour may be defined as any action regarding authority in general and government
in particular.
Political behaviour or behavioral approach to the study of politics “identifies the
behaviour of individuals or group of individuals as the primary unit of analysis”. It seeks
to examine the behaviour, actions and acts of individuals, rather than characteristics of
institutions such as legislature, executive and judiciary”.
Robert Dahl (1961), and David Easton (1961). The main aim of political behavior is to
“explain behaviour with an unbiased, neutral point of view, using methods such as
sampling, scaling statistical analysis and interviewing among others. The most practical
way to do it is to focus on individuals and groups who are the actors in politics.
Discourse in political behaviour are devoted to provide a sound
understanding of the relationship between the political actions of citizens and the political
process in a democracy, and this is why the subject now covers issues such as political
attitudes, extra electoral forms political participation such a protest, resistance, social
movement, apathy, and extremism, as well as consequences for political representation
and political systems.
According to Eldersveld and Katz in 1961, political behaviour or behavioural approach to the
study of politics “identifies the behaviour of individuals or group of individuals as the primary
unit of analysis”. It “seeks to examine the behaviour, actions and acts of individuals, rather than
characteristics of institutions such as legislature, executive and judiciary”. Traditionally, the
study of politics was legalistic, normative and based on institutions, and this certainly made it
challenging for the discipline to fully explain and understand the behaviour of people within their
political environments. It was the need to overcome this shortcoming and achieve a better
5
 understanding of politics that gave birth to the “behavioral revolution”. This was a banner under
which sociologists, survey researchers and other empiricists gathered in the 1950s to distinguish
themselves from those who studied constitutions, philosophy, or history, and prominent scholars
who championed the revolution are Robert Dahl (1961), and David Easton (1961). The main aim
of political behavior is to “explain behaviour with an unbiased, neutral point of view, using
methods such as sampling, scaling statistical analysis and interviewing among others. The most
practical way to do it is to focus on individuals and groups who are the actors in politics.
However, subsequent scholarly definitions of political behaviour seem to have expanded beyond
the issue of method and approach. The current state of political behaviour, as some scholars now
claim, is typically concerned with individual behaviour in the society. One of such scholars is
Richard Rose who, in her 2007 work claims that political behaviour is the study of the behaviour
of political actors such as voters, lobbyists, and politicians.
Thus, currently, discourses in political behaviour are devoted to provide a sound understanding
of the relationship between the political actions of citizens and the political process in a
democracy, and this is why the subject now covers issues such as political attitudes, extra
electoral forms political participation such a protest, resistance, social movement, apathy, and
extremism, as well as consequences for political representation and political systems.
From whichever angle it is defined, what you need to really grasp is that political behaviour
studies the behaviour of individuals and groups towards politics and political institutions in their
environment, and it attempts to use scientific methods to study them.

THE STUDY OF POLITICS BEFORE BEHAVIOURAL REVOLUTION

Before the era of political behaviour, specifically up to the period of 1900, the study of politics
was dominated by two main methodological approaches: the Normative Philosophical Approach
and the Descriptive -Institutional Approach. In what follows we explain these two approaches in
details.

(a) The Normative - Philosophical Approach:

This was based on reflections on and interrogations of early philosophers towards political
events and values across the globe. Socio political events such as justice, polity, legitimacy state,
and power and wealth distributions were the main subjects of interrogation and investigation

6
 because early philosophers regarded them as most essential to the understanding of politics and
the peaceful co- existence of people and nations. Most questions the philosophers asked revolved
around what justice is, how it is achieved and what importance it should be accorded it in
human polity; what action or practice is legitimate, what the ideal role of the state is, and how
power, wealth and other values are equitably distributed in the society to guarantee
egalitarianism. Philosophers who engaged in these questioning include Plato, Aristotle, St
Augustine, St Thomas Aquinas, Niccolo Machiavelli, Thomas Hobbes, John Locke and Jean-
Jacques Rousseau.

(b) The Descriptive - Institutional Approach

This approach basically described structures and institutions of politics and government. It
originally focused on the discussion of the evolution and operation of legislatures, executives and
judiciaries which are respectively the institutions for making, carrying out and interpreting the
law. This later came to include bureaucracies, political parties, pressure groups, interest groups,
constitutions, and other frameworks that are constantly interacted with in politics. Unlike the
foregoing approach, the Descriptive - Institutional Approach is more interested in facts than
values, seeking to provide fact based information on structures and institutions such as
constitution and its forms, parliament and its parliamentary supremacy, law making procedures,
supremacy of the law, elections and other means of choosing and changing representatives.
Before the era of political behaviour, these two approaches dominated the study of politics. Socio
political values were studied based on individual’s subjectivity and perspectives, and then
institutions of politics were described from historical antecedents and values emanating from
philosophers’ thoughts. In these two approaches however stands a gap: the individual or group
that is the operators of political institutions and interpreters of political values are amiss! What
about them? How do we understand the output of institutions and values without first
understanding the people who man them, their values, attitudes, orientations, socializations and
other things? All these determine, to a great extent, what they do in their political environments.
The point at which political scientists began to ask these questions was the outset of the
behavioral approach.
Remi Anifowose summarized the issues that provoked these questions as “low level of
generalization or finding, untenable assumptions and premises that influence and sometimes

7
distorted findings, mere value laden findings and assumptions, emphasis on the study of
institutions to exclude political process, neglect of the findings of other social science
disciplines, as well as accumulation of irrelevant facts”.

THE BEHAVIOURAL REVOLUTION

The beginning of the behavioural revolution in political science may be traced to the publication
in 1908 of Human Nature in Politics by Graham Wallas, and The Process of Government by
Arthur Bentley. As earlier pointed out, the behavioral revolution in politics came as oppositional
response to the normative –philosophical and descriptive- institutional orientations that were
used for the study of politics in earlier periods. Proponents of the behavioral revolution not only
emphasized facts over values, as stated above, they also argued that it is the behaviour of
individuals in political institutions, rather than the institutions themselves, that is the essence of
politics. They proposed the use of rigorous scientific and empirical methods in political research,
in a bid to make the discipline of political science as advanced and as generalizing as
conventional sciences such as Chemistry and Physics. Behaviouralists also called for greater
integration of political science with other social sciences such as Psychology, Sociology and
economics.
Using psychological and sociological approaches to analyze the role of individuals and groups in
day to day political conduct in the state, Wallas and Bentley in their respective books earlier
mentioned focused on the behavioral and informal processes of political activities, rather than
philosophical postulations, armchair theorizing, structures and institutions of government. This is
a radical departure from the past.
By the 1920s, the behavioral revolution had got to its peak through the efforts of two major
intellectual giants: Charles Merriam and his student, Harold Lasswell who both introduced to the
study of politics, such new and scientifically systematic concepts as power and political elites.
The revolution progressed enormously, up to the period from 1925 up to the end of the Second
World War (1937-45). It witnessed a tremendous revival and dominated the study of politics
throughout the fifties. This was made possible through the relentless intellectual efforts of key
behaviouralists such as David Easton, Robert Dahl, Karl Deutsch, Gabriel Almond, David
Truman and others who later came to dominate the discipline.
By the late sixties however, some behaviouralists began to agitate for the revision of the

8
behavioral approach to accommodate new developments in political phenomenon. Spearheaded
by David Easton, this revisionist movement is known as post-behavioral movement.
The revolution progressed enormously, up to the period from 1925 up to the end of the Second
World War (1937-45). It witnessed a tremendous revival and dominated the study of politics
throughout the fifties. This was made possible through the relentless intellectual efforts
of key behaviouralists such as David Easton, Robert Dahl, Karl Deutsch, Gabriel Almond, David
Truman and others who later came to dominate the discipline.
By the late sixties however, some behaviouralists began to agitate for the revision of the
behavioral approach to accommodate new developments in political phenomenon.
Spearheaded by David Easton, this revisionist movement is known as post-behavioral
movement.
GRAHAM WALLAS – “The study of politics is nothing without the study of man, for man’s
personality and behavioural pattern dominate the development of political action”
WATER LIPMAN – “We must put man at the centre of politics even though we are densely
ignorance of man and politics”
HEINZ EULAU – “The political behaviour of individual person is the central and critical datum
of the behavioural approaches in politics”
ARTHUR BENTLEY – When the groups are adequately stated, everything is stated when I say
everything I mean everything”
DAVID TRUMAN – “Politics is not the sum of group behaviour but is at the centre of political
process”

FOUNDATIONS OF THE BEHAVIOURAL APPROACH

1. Regularities
Behaviouralists argued that the political behaviour of individuals is governed by certain general
underlying assumptions and conditions which can be discovered through systematic study. In
other words, the political behaviour of individuals is not arbitrary is governed by certain
discoverable factors. For example, if a group of individuals may continue to vote for the same
party over a long period of time. Through behavioral research we may be able to show, that the b
ehaviour of these individuals is related to such factors as their socio economic status, ethnic
identity or ideological orientation.
9
On the basis of this knowledge, the behaviouralist will not only be able to explain but also
predict the political behaviour of these individuals and others. In short, therefore, behaviouralists
argued that there are discoverable uniformities or regularities in political behaviour and that
these can be expressed in systematic generalizations or theories with explanatory and predictive
values.
2. Verification
The behaviouralists emphasized the need to make the study of politics as factual, empirical and
scientific as possible. They argued that just as the natural and physical
sciences are based on actual and observable events, political science most also be based on
factual or empirical processes. They, therefore, contended that all statements,
generalizations or theories about political behaviour must be based on factual observation and
must be testable or verifiable by reference to actual political conduct. This process of
empirical verification is the most important criterion for assessing the validity, acceptability or
utility of any generalizations or statements about political behaviour.
3. Techniques
The observation of political behaviour and the verification of statements and generalizations
arising from the observation must be based on the use of reliable and
sophisticated scientific techniques, including well-structured interviews, sample surveys,
statistical measurements and mathematical models. In short, the behaviouralists argued that
reliable and effective means must be developed for observing, recording and analyzing political
behaviour.
4. Quantification
The use of statistical and mathematical measurements can help to achieve adequate precision or
accuracy in observing, recording and analyzing political behaviour. Data and facts are processed
scientifically. But in the entire process, everything is measured and quantified.
There must, therefore, be a shift in methods from the qualitative judgments that dominated the
Normative-Philosophical Approach, to the quantitative measurements that are usually associated
with the natural and physical sciences. Behaviouralists however, resolved that quantitative
methods must be used not for their own sake, but only where possible, relevant and meaningful
in the light of other objectives. This is why David Truman asserted that the political scientist
should perform his research in 'quantitative terms if he can, and in qualitative terms, if he must'.
10
5. Values
Values or ethical evaluations are a feature of the Normative-Philosophical approach to the study
of politics and must be deemphasized in the scientific behavioral approach. The behavioral
approach is not guided by ethical evaluations. Rather, it is based on empirical and scientific
explanation. While the student of political behaviour may sometimes make ethical judgments or
evaluations, he should for the sake of clarity not confuse them with empirical observations or
generalizations. In other words, empirical political research must be kept analytically distinct
from ethical or moral philosophy.
In analysing political behaviour and collecting data behaviouralists cautiously proceed. They
observe that empirical judgment and value judgment are not mixed. In earlier days, political
behaviour was associated with normative judgment—that is, everything was judged in the
perspective of values and norms.
But Easton observes that these two approaches are quite distinct and the distinction must be
maintained. Otherwise, the political analysis of individuals’ behaviour will not be able to face
the proper test.
6. Systematization
Any piece of empirical political research, or any attempt at the observation of political data, must
not be seen as an end in itself but as a means to the development of a
systematic theory or generalization. In other words, empirical research should be 'theory-oriented
and theory-directed'. Indeed research and theory should be 'developed as mutually indispensable
parts of the scientific study of political behaviour. As David Easton put it, 'research untutored by
theory may prove trivial, and theory unsupported by data, futile'. From the beginning to the end
the behaviouralists shall proceed orderly or systematically.
The failure of the researcher to be systematic will put him in problems such as success will be
in troubles. Collection of data and facts, research, analysis, building up conclusions and
everything else are closely related. This is systematisation.
It is important to note that a theory is an empirically testable statement that is designed to explain
certain events or facts. It is an important element of any scientific enterprise or endeavor. At the
most basic level, a theory can take the form of such testable generalizations as: 'Issues do not
have a significant influence on the party preferences of the electorate ethnic affiliation is the
most important determinant of voting behavior’. ‘An electoral system based on proportional
11
representation encourages a multi-party system’. These are hypothetical mainly, but they are also
theoretical too.
In essence, systematization means that any research on political behaviour must be pursued not
as an end in itself but as a means to prove or disprove the kind of generalizations indicated
above.
7. Pure Science
Applied research, or the application of scientific knowledge to the solution of
social problems, is as much a part of the scientific enterprise as is theoretical understanding or ex
planation. However, the scientific explanation of political behaviour logically precedes and
provides the basis for any efforts to utilize political knowledge to the solution of urgent socio-
political problems. To the behaviouralists, this implies that greater importance should be attached
to pure research or scientific explanation than applied research, policy formulation or 'political
engineering'. Indeed the behaviouralists argued that a political scientist should be contented with
understanding and explaining political behaviour even if the resultant knowledge cannot be
applied to solve specific socio-political problems.
8. Integration
Finally, the behavioral approach seeks to promote the unity of the social sciences,
namely political science, economics, sociology, psychology and geography. It expresses the hope
that someday the walls which separate political sciences from the other social sciences will
crumble. Behaviouralists argued that because the social sciences deal with the totality of social
existence, political research can ignore the findings of other social science disciplines only at the
risk of undermining the validity and relevance of its own results or generalizations.

Political Socialization
Political socialization is the process of transferring knowledge, beliefs, attitudes and general
dispositions about politics from one generation to the other. It accumulates almost unconsciously
through citizens and people’s interactions with social institutions such as the family, the religious
houses, the schools, the tertiary institutions, the media, and political parties and so on. These
institutions through which people are socialized into political values are called agencies of
political socialization. Social scientists, especially those favorably disposed towards social
learning theories; believe strongly that whatever a man behaves like in the society and its

12
politics- from activism to its other extreme of apathy- is primarily a function of how he or she
was socialized by these agencies.

Political Culture
Political culture refers to the dominant state or situation of citizens’ awareness of issues and
stakes in the political system, their evaluation as well as acceptance or rejection (as the case may
be) of the system, and, in the third part, their expectations about the relationship among actors
and participants in the political system. Unlike political participation that is a process; political
culture is a state, and the dominant state among various states. This means that when we say that
a country has a particular political culture, the true situation is that that culture so identified is the
major one among others that exist. Like political socialization, political culture also largely
determines political behavior, and the method with which the behavioral school investigates
political phenomena often focus on it.

Political Participation
Political participation has to do with the involvement of the people or citizens of a country in the
political affairs of that country. People participate by influencing, directly or indirectly, the
composition of government, the policies they make, and the practices they institute. Election is a
major way of political participation. However, participation in politics also includes many other
ways in which citizens try to influence governmental decisions. Such ways, apart from voting,
include campaigning, attending meetings, funding political parties, lobbying, protesting, forming
social movements, belonging to nongovernmental organizations of civil society groups, and, to
mention but just a few, joining social movement. All the foregoing activities influence politics in
one way or the other, so, they are aspects of political participation.
Political participation is a wide concept, and in the subsequent unit where it will be fully
discusses, efforts will be made to highlight the several dimensions it takes as well as the factors
that often determine it. In summary however, participation basically involves the attempts by
private citizens to influence the composition and decisions of government, a process which goes
beyond just voting or participating in electoral activities.

Definitions of Political Socialization

Beginning from the old, Gabriel Almond and Sidney Verba define political socialization as a

13
 'learning process by which the norms associated with the performance of political roles as well as
fundamental political values and guiding standards of political behaviour are learned'. This is
contained in their article entitled, 'The Comparative Study of Political Socialization'. Apart from
this, Robert Levine asserts, the process of political socialization as involving the acquisition by
an individual, of behavioral dispositions relevant to political groups, political systems and
political processes. Let us put other definitions in more direct forms.
Eric Rowe (1969): “political socialization is the process by which the values, beliefs and
emotions of a political culture are passed on to succeeding generations”.
Harry Eckstein: Political socialization is the “process through which operative social norms
regarding politics are implanted, political roles institutionalised and political consensus created,
either effectively or ineffectively”.
Roberta Sigel (1972): “Political socialization is the learning process by which the political norms
and behaviors acceptable to an ongoing political system are transmitted from generation to
generation”.
Gerald Bender (1967): “Political socialization is the process through which the individual
internalizes politically relevant attitudes, beliefs, cognitions and values”.
More recent definitions of political socialization include those of Eric Siraev and Richard Sobel
(1995): “Political socialization is a lifelong process by which individuals learn political attitudes
and behaviors. It is part of the broader socialization process whereby an individual becomes a
member of a particular society and takes on its values and behaviors. Social and cultural
conditions mediate political socialization”.
Powell & Cowart (2003): “Political socialization is the study of the developmental processes by
which children of all ages (12 to 30), and adolescents acquire political cognition, attitudes, and
behaviors”.

Factors Affecting Political Socialization

Although political socialization is made possible through certain agencies, certain factors still
determine whether or not a person will be socialized and in whatever direction. The factors are:
(A) Strength of Socializing Agency: It has been argued often that some socializing agents are
stronger and more effective than others. The family for instance is the first agent of political
socialization that a child is exposed to at a tender age when his or her personality is still being

14
 formed. This is followed by the Schools (elementary and secondary). These two agencies are
more effective in socializing people compared to the media and the political party.
(B) Proximity to and Interaction with Socialization Agency: Agencies of socialization become
effective in the lives of those who are close to as well as who interact with them. An atheist who
has no religion is not, for instance likely to be socialized by the church or the shrine, while an
illiterate introvert may miss the socializing opportunities offered by the school and the peer
group.
(C) Reinforcement System: Socialization patterns can sometimes depend on reinforcement system.
An agent that has a system of positive reinforcement is more likely to be more effective in
socializing people in certain directions; vice versa. This is particularly true in families and
schools. If interest in politics is positively reinforced in the family and school, children in the two
institutions have better chances of political socialization than where it is not.
(D) Period and Age of Socialization: Although socialization is a continuous exercise in the life of
man, social scientists agree that personalities, believes and attitudes of people are often fully
formed when they are young, say below 20 years. The interpretation of this is that socialization
tends to be more effective when it occurs to people of tender ages, and at the period of their lives
during which their personalities are being developed.

Definitions of Political Culture

In conceptualising political culture, it is from the two words that is, ‘political’ and ‘culture’. That
is the relationship between politics and culture, and culture simply refers to a well established
way of life of a people in a particular community. (In Clyde Kluckhohn work (1963) titled “
Mirror of Man” for further understanding of the nexus between culture and politics). In a simple
sense therefore, the concept of political culture refers to the dominant political way of life of a
people in a particular political community. The following definitions are thereby highlighted for
thorough understanding.
Tylor (1924) defined political culture as “the complex whole which includes knowledge, beliefs,
arts morals, laws, custom, and other capabilities and habits acquired by man as a member of the
society”.

Lucian Pye, (1962) defined political culture as “ the set of attitudes, believes and sentiments

15
which give order and meaning to a political process and which provides the underlying
assumptions and rules that govern behaviour in the political system. It encompasses both the
political ideals and the operating norms of a polity”.

Some leading scholars of behavioral tradition, Gabriel Almond and S. Verba (1963) also defined
political culture as “the patterns of individual political orientations, the attitudes towards the
political system and its various parts, and to the role of the self in the political system”.
In the words of Sydney Verba, (1965) political culture can be defined as “a system of empirical
beliefs, expressive symbols and values which defines the situation in which political action takes
place”.
From the above definitions, the concept of political culture has such common characteristics as
the attitudes and values of man towards politics in a particular environment. So apart from the
first definition given in this unit (before citing the foregoing four), we may crown up with the
description of political culture by the Encyclopedia Britannica as an “attempt to uncover deep-
seated, long-held values characteristic of a society or group rather than ephemeral attitudes
toward specific issues”, of course issues that are political.

Political Culture and Political Socialization

Now that you have a broad, yet synergized understanding of political culture, let us compare it to
its indispensable partner, political socialization. As defined above, political socialization as the
process of transferring knowledge, beliefs, attitudes and general dispositions about politics from
one generation to the other, and that it accumulates almost unconsciously through citizens and
people’s interactions with social institutions such as the family, the religious houses, the schools,
the tertiary institutions, the media, political parties and so on. The knowledge, values and beliefs
that are transferred, and that accumulate through agents mentioned above are nothing but
political, culture, because political culture is what political socialization transfers. So, while
political socialization is a process, a culture is a state.
Furthermore, while political socialization refers to process, and a process is a means of achieving
some end, culture as a state is not sacrosanct, it operates at different levels. So, as elementary
sociology will assert that we have cultures and subcultures within a particular cultural
community, when we say political culture what we also mean is the dominant political culture, as
there will always be other cultures around dominant ones. So, you need to note that when we
16
 refer to political culture in any literature, what we mean is just the way of political life that is
dominant among a people. There are other non dominant ones.
Another thing you probably need to know is that while we say both political culture and political
socialization refer to values and they are not empirical, method of studying them can be, and, as
a matter of fact, empiric zed by way of information and data gathered through public opinion
surveys and other methods.

FORMS OF POLITICAL CULTURE

Almond and Verba’s Classification: Parochial, Subject and Participant
The earliest and most prominent attempt to categorize political culture was made by Gabriel
Almond and Sidney Verba (1963). They compared five democratic nations and surveyed 1,000
persons as samples in the United States, the United Kingdom, Germany, Italy, and Mexico, and
they came out with three levels of political culture: Parochial, Subject and Participant. These
three levels of political culture shall be discussed in what follows.
(a) Parochial Political Culture: A parochial political culture exists where there are no specialized
political roles and people‘s knowledge of politics does not go beyond their immediate
environment. In this kind of culture, religious and ethnic considerations are often put beyond
general interest, and people participate in politics mainly because of them, not because of wider
socio economic reasons. Where parochial political culture is dominant, citizens hardly make
demands from their governments either because of ignorance of what governance is all about, or
because they lack trust for the political leaders. Parochial political culture is found among many
poor and developing nations that are pre disposed to contradictions such as ethnic rivalry,
indigene settler dichotomy, and primordial sentiments.
(b) Subject Political Culture: In a subject political culture, majority of people merely simply align
with policies and practices of government almost as obedient servants. The hardly participate in
making, amendment or implementation of those policies. This kind of political culture is
common where the government expects absolute obedience from the people and they
institutionalize means of achieving it. People therefore have little choice but to follow suit
because they are just subjects.
(c) Participant Political Culture: In a participant political culture, people understand politics and
governance and make several attempts to participate in it. Their participation ranges from voting,

17
 attending meetings, joining associations and forming organization. They also mobilize people to
participate in protest, social movements where necessary, and they educate others around them
on the roles of the government in their lives and how they can make government perform them.
Tunde Babawale adds that where participant political culture is dominant, people “manifest
attitudes of personal political competence and they participate in active political process.
Advanced countries such as Britain and the United States are found in this category.
There are other categorizations of political culture apart from the popular one made by Almond
and Verba. A key one is that of Daniel Elazar who defines political culture as “what people
believe and feel about government, and how they think people should act towards it” and, in
another dimension, "the particular pattern of orientation to political action in which each political
system is imbedded." In his 1970 work titled the metropolitan frontier and American politics,
Daniel Elazar studied the states in the United States and came out with three categories of
political culture there in: Moral political culture, individual political culture and traditional
political culture. Let us again examine each of them.

(a) Moral Political Culture.

Where this culture is dominant, people consider the entirety of their society more important than
their individual self, and they allow this to guide them in all their dealings with the political
authorities. Government tends to be seen as a positive force. The moral political culture,
according to Eleazar’s findings, was dominant in Upper New England, the Upper Middle West
of the United States. This emphasizes the commonwealth conception as the basis for democratic
government. Politics is considered one of the great activities of man in the search for common
good of the society, and good government is measured by the degree to which it promotes the
public good. In a moral political culture, actions and inactions are based on issues, not personal
considerations, and politics is often engaged in for record setting and not personal profiteering.

(b) Individual Political Culture

This is the political culture that was dominant in the Middle-Atlantic States through Illinois, and
to the West where government has a very practical orientation and is instituted for utilitarian
reasons. Emphasis is not on the common good of the society, but on how to restrict the powers of
the state in intervening with the private lives of the citizens. In other words, in an Individual
political culture, government exists for the purpose preserving and protecting private lives of eh
18
 citizens. This type of political culture is not unconnected to the political history of the
federalist/anti federalist, abolitionist and anti abolitionist movement in the United States.

(c) Traditional Political Culture.

In this political culture, certain families run governmental activities and while others appear to be
spectators, just like in a hierarchical and natural order system. Although government is seen as
performing positive roles in the society, yet, people perceive the roles mainly in terms of
maintaining social order and the general status quo. In this political culture, the ruling elite is
indulged into mere conformism instead of innovation, and there is a strong interplay of class
conspiracies. The Southern part of the United States was noted for this king of political culture.

Finer’s Classification: Minimal, Low, Developed and Mature

Another scholar, Finer, made invaluable contribution towards categorizing political culture.
Unlike Almond &Verba and Daniel Elazar tripartite dimensions of political culture, Samuel
Finer, in his book, The man on the Horse Back, written in 1962, identifies four levels of political
culture: Minimal, Low, Developed and Mature, and like Almond and Verba, he situated the
different levels in different socio political environments. Finer’s typology of political culture is
however based on political institutions, procedures and legitimacy of rulers. Detailed discussion
of his categorization is as follow.

(a) Mature Political Culture

This refers to a system in which institutions of government are very effective to the extent that
majority follow appropriate procedures to recruit political leaders. In such a system, a political
aberration such as military coup will not only be unwarrantable but also inconceivable. Countries
such as Britain, Canada, United States and Australia are full of this political culture.

(b) Developed Political Culture

In this kind of system, there is high level of administrative and bureaucratic stability. Institutions
of government may also be very effective e but people do not really concerned about the
procedure of attaining governmental powers as well as how it is retained. Germany, Japan and
the defunct Soviet Union rightly belong here.

(c) Low Political Culture

19
 A low political culture is that in which one may not confidently call people citizens because they
are very poorly organizes and are not pro active towards governmental activities. People do not
also agree on bureaucratic and administrative position of the state, so, issues such as military
coup, perverted revenue sharing and intra structural relations within the country may be
subjected to prevailing pulse of the people rather that legitimate or established procedures.
According to Finer, Egypt, Syria, South Korea, Turkey and Iran belong here.

(d) Low Political Culture

This is a system where the ruling class acts with impunity because they are brutal and more
coercive than the unorganized and politically passive people. In this place military intervention
in politics is perceived as normal, and leaders can fidget with public opinion at will. Nigeria
belongs here. Note that at a time in Nigeria’s history, intellectual and the political class proposed
what they called diarchy, a system that enables cooperative operation of military and civilian
rule. This shows how much the people had been used to military rule. Many other countries of
West Africa can also be put under this category.

Primary Agents of Political Socialization

The primary agents of political socialization are those that people first come across when they
are children and they unavoidably interact with as they grow. Almost all human beings pass
through these agents, though not necessarily on their will. The primary agents of political
socialization in today’s world include the family, the school, the peer group and the religious
gatherings. In the contemporary world these socialization agencies can hardly be avoided, and
they affect people’s believes and attitudes towards politics.

(a) The Family

The family is a principal agent of political socialization, or any other form of socialization at all.
In fact, M. Kent Jennings in his 2007 work titled “Political Socialization” asserts that "from the
early scholarly inquiries on through to the present time, the role of the family as a prime agent of
socialization has occupied an imports in the literature". This is because the family is a relatively
small and enduring institution that makes the processes of learning and imitation easier. Apart
from this, the family is the first point of call of the individual, and, to that extent, it determines a
lot about individual's behaviour; including the political. Above all, every human being, by no

20
 choice of theirs, is presumably born into a family, so, except in few cases, every human being
passes through the socialization of the family.

(b) The School

Formal educational system organized in forms of schools and colleges is a common phenomenon
in the modern world. In fact, most advanced countries of the world are beginning to lay claim to
zero percent illiteracy level in their society while third world countries are following suit. The
implication of this is that everyone in the society will now have to pass through one form of
school or the other. Thus, the school, like the family, is an agent of socialization that is almost
impossible to escape. Some societies deliberately teach subjects such as civil education, political
history and government to educate their citizens on politics. National anthems and other extra
curriculum exercises are basically performed in schools to expose students to certain values
about politics. What most people know and believe about politics is therefore, especially in
today’s world, a function of school attendance. The school then qualifies as a primary agency of
political socialization.

(c) The Peer Group

Man, by nature, Aristotle has long insisted, is a political animal. What you get from this is that
man is a gregarious being that love to live with, and around other men. In the process of this
social interaction peer groups are formed. These groups consist of people of same or close age
brackets, and members of the groups learn many things socially from one another through
emulation and reciprocal determinism. If a person belongs to a peer group that is politically
conscious for instance, the tendency of the person to become very active and interested in the
politics of his nation is very high due to the kind of socialization received in the course of
interacting with his or her peers. Peer group is also a primary agent of political socialization
because it is difficult to escape in the process of existing in the society. Even schools where the
child is socialized is full of peer group influence, though many peer groups also exist outside the
school.

(d) Religious Gatherings

Apart from the family and the school, organized religious gathering is another very strong
21
 agency of political socialization in the modern world. It is almost inescapable today. When
people gather in the name of religion, they often inevitably discuss socio political issues that
concern them directly or indirectly, politics being, according to David Easton, “authoritative
allocation of values in the society”. Values that may be authoritatively allocated to, or omitted
from people’s homes, families, streets, work places, states of residence, international relation and
so on, often make people relate with politics even in religious gatherings where they are
supposed to be worshiping. Today is universities, religious associations sponsor candidates into
elective positions in order to gain influence. Citizens of some countries consider the religious
affiliation of a political candidate as determinant of his or her capacity to rule, and such beliefs
color behaviour even in elections. The discussions and decision on these political issues are often
taken in religious gatherings; hence, religion becomes a strong agent of political socialization.

Subordinate Agents of Political Socialization

Structures and institutions such as the media and political parties are not common to all men;
they are optional, so they belong to the secondary political socialization agents. Other ones in
this category are gender and age which are though common to all men, yet, do not command
strong organizational political influence that, say, the church and the school may have. Let us
examine these four agents of political socialization in details.

(a) The Media

The media is a strong agent of political socialization. The print media produces newspapers and
magazines while the electronic media comes in forms of radio and television. In all of these
media politics and political issues are discussed in daily basis. In fact, it has been argued by
Allan Smith that the 21st century press media is a political media as majority of the news items
are either completely political or are connected to politics. The most recent one is the social
media: the Facebook and the twitters that are fast penetrating the whole world. Issues discussed
in all these media create values, attitudes and believes in people, and as such, stand as means of
socializing them into politics as well as influencing their political behaviour.

(b) Political Party

A political party is an organized body of people who participate in political activities with the
sole aim of getting political power. Membership of a political party automatically translates to

22
 discussion and practice of political activities, with all the pranks, and the intrigues. People who
belong to political parties learn a great deal of their political tricks, values, orientations, opinions
and believes from them, so, the political party is a very strong agent of political socialization. In
specific terms, political parties have orientations and ideological divides. There are left wing
parties, right wing parties, mass parties and so on, and the orientation that is dominant in each of
these parties are systematically handed down to their members from one generation to another.
In Britain you have the conservative (right wing) and the labour (left wing) political parties. In
the United States it is between the Republican (right wing) and the Democrat (left wing) parties.
Although Nigerian political parties have been unstable and episodic since independence, the
current ideological divide still stands between the PDP and the APC.
(c) Gender
Until recently when universal adult suffrage has permeated the whole world, gender was a very
key issue in political socialization. In the earlier Athenian society in Greece, women were not
allowed to participate in politics, and so it was in some other parts of the world. The implication
is that men would be differently socialized to form different believes opinions and orientation of
politics, compared to women. Now that the dichotomy is changing rapidly, and universal adult
suffrage is gaining popularity around the world; women’s socialization in politics is fast taking
different dimension. Conversely, in the old Oyo kingdom where women were known to occupy
important political positions such as Iyalode, Iyaloja and Iyalaje, and where they exerted great
influence in the politics of their people, there was a difference in gender relationship with
politics, and this created egalitarian and democratic values among the people. You may wish to
read Eesuola’s Using Indigenous Political Structures to Facilitate Democratic Ideals in Nigeria:
Lessons from Pre Colonial Yoruba Kingdom, published in the University of Lagos, Nigeria,
Sociological Review, Volume 9, 2011.
(d) Age
Also unlike gender, age was and is still a strong factor in the politics of courtiers. Today, as a
result of universal adult suffrage, most constitutions allow citizens of eighteen years to vote and
be voted for. In some countries where gerontology is common in political activities, only old
people take certain electoral positions in politics. These different practices in different societies
often shape opinions and orientations of people towards politics, so, age is equally an agent of
political socialization.
23
 Analysis of the Functions
(a) Intergenerational Transmission of Political Values
Political socialization assists every society in preserving political culture across time. It also
helps to inculcate political values and orientation in people. This is the function we call
intergenerational transmission of political norms, and, by extension, values, symbols and ideas.
For instance, a person who attends the university, majors in engineering and later gets
employment in an engineering firm may not at all understand the workings of law making and
recall except he or she witnessed it at eh level of students union which the school as an agent of
political socialization offers. In an increasingly complicated world where politics is fast
becoming everyone’s business even though we do not all major in politics, agents of
socialization serves the purpose of transmitting political values and norms from one generation
to the other, and this helps in ensuring stability in the society.

(b) Stability of Polity

By virtue of performing the foregoing function of intergenerational transmission of values and
inculcation of political culture, political socialization helps to maintain continuity and stability in
the society. Such stability is needed to advance the course of the society from all walks of life.
To the extent that political socialization is a means of role-training therefore, it, at any time
equips the members of a society with the basic skills necessary for political participation or the
performance of important political roles.
(C) Creation of Hegemonic Order
Political socialization helps the society to create hegemonic order. Every political environment
needs hegemony to stabilize and develop, hegemony being a subtle, non coerced assimilation of
how things are done in a society. Political socialization helps a society to foster this, and every
member of the society needs only little push or coercion to obey the law and promote good
values.
(d) National Discipline
Political socialization makes it easy to ensure some degree of discipline among members of a
political community. In other words, political socialization curbs or controls disruptive political
behaviour by ensuring that members of a society behave in a manner that is socially acceptable
to the majority of the people, and especially the hegemonic class.
24
 (e) Political socialization assists in promotion of patriotism and nationalism. People, who learn
the political values, believe and orientations of their people and hand the same down from one
generation to the other tend to become obsessed with it. They see themselves as being embedded
in such values and ideas and are often willing to defend and promote it at any time necessary.
This is called patriotism, and it is useful for the domestic and international aura of a state.

Definitions of Political Participation

Like most political science concepts, political participation has attracted several definitions and
meanings from several scholars. Some of these definitions are generic, that is, they try as much
as possible to capture all aspects and dimensions in which people can participate in politics.
Some are however limited, in that they discriminate against some aspects of participation as
irregular or abnormal. We consider a few of them in what follows. While the following
definition is seemingly restrictive:
(a) Political participation refers to those legal activities by private citizens which are more or less
directly aimed at influencing the selection of government personnel and/or the actions they take
(Norman H. Nie and Sidney Verba).

What follows here is a group of broader senses of meaning.

(a) The activity of private citizens designed to influence government decision making. (Samuel
Huntington and Jorge Dominguez).
(b) Those voluntary activities by which members of society share in the selection of rulers and,
directly or indirectly, in the formation of public policy (H. McClosky).
(c) Political participation derives from the freedom to speak out, assemble and associate; the ability
to take part in the conduct of public affairs; and the opportunity to register as a candidate, to
campaign, to be elected and to hold office at all levels of government.
What is of utmost important to contemporary study of political behaviour is that political
participation can include both legal and illegal attempts to influence governmental decisions. It is
concerned with influencing the composition and conduct, or personnel and policies. It is not
limited to voting at elections but includes many other ways in which citizens try to influence
governmental decisions. It is based on this that we discuss in what follows, the various
dimensions that political participation can take in human society.
25
 Scope of Political Participation
By scope of political participation, this means the main those broad of activities that political
participation covers, or that can be regarded as forms of political participation. When people
campaign for candidates during elections, or they attend constituency meetings or cast their
ballot during voting period, we often consider their actions as political participation. Remember
however, that not doing all these, or doing them for certain reasons are also forms of
participation in politics. A renowned professor of philosophy, Jim Una once wrote that “even
nothing is nothing”, and a very popular slogan in party electioneering politics is that “failure to
vote for a candidate is a ballot cast for the opponent of the candidate”. Based on this logic, the
scope of political participation shall be bi patterned: direct or action based, as well as indirect or
attitude based political activities.

(a) Direct or action based Political Activities

These activities refer to those that people deliberately engage in as standards of participation in
politics. They include voting, attendance of meetings, campaigning, sponsorship of candidates,
money and material donation, attending rallies and committee meetings, etc. These actions are
clear cut, and need no further interpretation before they are recognized as forms of political
participation. Those who participate in them often have defined political goals, even when not
disclosed.
(b) Indirect or Attitude Based Political Participation
These refer to people’s attitudes and dispositions that indirectly influence politics around them.
This form of political participation is not necessarily clear cur, and it is often unclear if those
who display them are aware of their impact as political participation. These attitudes include but
are not limited to agitation, resistance, apathy, endorsement, docility, skepticism, cynicism, etc.
Those who display résistance attitude towards politics for instance complement chance of
leadership in extra electoral forms, while apathetic persons allow other citizens have field days
fielding and electing their own candidates. If they apathetical person had voted, his vote only
could make any difference in number, and as he or she refuses to vote, the attitude displayed
increases the chances of a candidate in opposition. This aspect is also covered by political
participation.
Apart from the forms which focus on the interpretation of attitudes as participating in politics,
26
political participation can also occur at various levels. Getting involved in political participation
entails costs in time, energy and resources, yet individuals and groups differ in the amount of
resources that they are able or willing to devote to political participation. Thus, while most
people engage in one kind of political participation or another, not all persons are able to
participate in politics to the same degree. In other words, participation of some people can be
more holistic than others.
In his 1965 book titled Political Participation, Lester Malbraith, categorized political
participation at the spectator-level, the transitional level and the gladiatorial level.

1. Gladiatorial Political Participation

This is the highest level of political participation a man can attain in a society. People who
participate at this level engage in activities such as presenting themselves as candidates for
political offices, or holding the offices at particular times, getting financial grants from political
parties for the purpose of elections, and politicking through caucus formations, faction formation
or kitchen cabinet. Political participation at this level takes so much time and resources that those
engaged in them hardly do other things aside politics. So, if you look around you today, those
people like your country’s president, governors, senators, presidential and gubernatorial aspirants
as well as other very active political figures even at the local government levels, can be
considered participants of politics at gladiatorial level. They can also be called members of the
political class, and they constitute about 5 percent of the population of any political community.

2. Transitorial Political Participation

Transitorial political participation is next in hierarchy to the gladiatorial. Participants at this level
often engage in activities that mostly facilitate ground for gladiatorial participants most likely
with the hope of getting political appointment after their candidates are successful. People who
participate at transitorial level are often very charismatic as much as gladiatorial participants, but
due to lack of other political logistics such as money, zoning, godfathers’ preferences (where
they play active roles in politics), and such people may choose to work behind the scene. Major
activities at the level of transitorial participation are meeting organization and attendance,
communication, advocacy and campaigns, liaising with incumbent power, as well as making of
monetary donations to candidates at the gladiatorial level.

27
 3. Spectatorial Political Participation
Spectatorial political participation includes but is not limited to voting, attending campaign
rallies, displaying party symbols and influencing friends and family to vote in certain direction.
These are activities that every citizen is expected to engage in as civil responsibility, aside from
those having some things at stake. This kind of participation is quite common amongst people. It
is relatively less expensive in terms of time and resources, so, it a majoritarian kind of political
participation.

Factors Affecting Political Participation

The following serves as determinants of political participation, namely political culture,
institutional and electoral arrangement; then party system, political leadership and socio-
economic status.
(a) Political Culture
Political culture includes ‘the state of attitudes, beliefs emotions and values of society that relate
to the political system and to political issues'. Writers like Gabriel Almond and Sidney Verba
have attempted to explain participation and apathy in terms of national differences in political
culture. Some countries are said to have participatory or participant cultures, and others subject
or non-participatory cultures. Where cultures are participatory, citizens display great enthusiasm
for politics, exhibit a high degree of pride in national political institutions and have a high sense
of political efficacy and civic duty. Non-participatory or subject political cultures, on the other
hand, foster attitudes of passivity, isolation, deference and citizen-withdrawal.
In their book, The Civic Culture, for example, Almond and Verba describe the United States of
America and Britain as having participant culture, and Germany and Italy as having a largely
non-participant or subject culture. It is, however, significant to note that a higher percentage of
the electorate participate in voting in Italy, where voter turnout in the seventies was about 94 per
cent, than in the United States, which had an average voter turnout of 54 percent in the same
period. This suggests that there may be other factors, apart from political culture, which
influence political participation.

(b) Institutional and Electoral Arrangement

Institutional and electoral arrangements have a significant impact on political participation,

28
 particularly voter turnout. An electoral system based on proportional representation, whereby all
parties are represented in parliament in proportion to the number of votes they receive,
encourages parties and candidates to mobilize voters everywhere and, therefore, increases voter
turnout. On the other hand, however, the use of the majority or first -past - the - post system -
which is based on single-member constituencies, with the party with the highest votes in a
constituency winning the seat for that constituency - leads to an imbalance in the translation of
votes into legislative seats and creates a disincentive to voting and Voter turnout.
A multi-party system, by encouraging coalition governments, gives elections a less decisive role
in government formation and, consequently, depresses voter turnout. By the same token, a two-
party system will tend to encourage voter participation. Unicameral legislative system, by
providing a clearer link between electorates and legislation, encourages citizen participation.
And because this link is relatively less visible in bicameral systems, participation in elections
tends to be lower in such systems
Finally, mandatory voting laws induce increased voter turnout, while difficult eligibility or
voting registration requirements dampen voter turnout. For example, countries like Australia,
Belgium and Italy have laws that compel voting, as did the Netherlands until 1970. In the United
States of America, on the other hand, electoral regulations requiring relatively stringent
residency and other eligibility requirements have inhibited voter differently.
In other words, we have identified the impact of political culture and institutional and electoral
arrangements on political participation. Participant political cultures tend to encourage greater
citizen participation than subject cultures. Similarly, the proportional representation principle,
two-party system, unicameralism and mandatory voting laws encourage the participation of
citizens in voting. The first-past-the-post electoral system, multi-party system, bicameralism and
difficult voting registration or eligibility requirements, on the other hand, discourage voter
turnout.

Party System, Political Leadership and Socio-economic Status

(c) The Party System
Political parties are extremely important in encouraging citizens to become politically active. In
some countries, the party system presents rather drastic choices of policy, ideology and group
benefits. In other countries, however, the parties do not offer sharply contrasting alternatives to

29
 voters. Where choices are sharply divergent and parties are clearly linked to particular groups,
the stakes of participation are very high, and citizens are more likely to get politically involved.

Furthermore, some parties do make considerable efforts to get citizens to vote. In India and
Mexico, for example, political parties, especially the governing parties, have often sent out
trucks to round up voters in the rural areas. In many other nations, party officials make elaborate
efforts to contact voters and to ensure that they actually vote. Because these party mobilization
strategies are well developed in some nations, such as Austria and Netherlands, moderately
developed in others, such as Western Germany and France, and quite weak in others, including
most parts of Nigeria and the United States, voting turnout is shaped accordingly.

(d) Political Leadership

Leaders or candidates with a particularly strong personal appeal can bring many apathetic or
apolitical people into political activity. Dwight D. Eisenhower, a hero of the Second World War
(1937-45), enjoyed such personal popularity or appeal in the United States in the 1950s. Julius
Nyerere in Tanzania and Fidel Castro in Cuba are two charismatic leaders of developing
countries who have mobilized their respective citizens into often intermittent, and sometimes
sustained, political activity.

(e) Socio-economic Status (SES)

Studies have repeatedly shown that better-educated, wealthier and occupationally- skilled
citizens are more likely, on the average, to develop participant attitudes. These citizens
invariably tend to be more politically enlightened, more attentive to political information, more
politically efficacious and better able to make use of opportunities for participation, than less
socio-economically privileged citizens. In short, better off citizens tend to be the most active in
politics. This tendency is, however, less pronounced in voting participation and far more visible
in the forming of pressure groups to influence governmental decisions. This lecture has,
however, concentrated more on voting participation than any other form of political participation
because voting is the simplest and most common form of participation in virtually all political
systems.
In conclusion, we should note that there are many factors, other than the five discussed in this
lecture, that affect political participation. Some of these other factors can be stated as follows:

30
sex (men are more likely to participate in politics than women), residence (the longer a person
resides in a given community, the greater the likelihood of his participation in politics), location
(urban dwellers tend to be more active in politics than rural dwellers) and social involvement
(those who participate in trade-union or voluntary activities are more likely to participate in
politics than those who do not take part in such activities).

POLITICAL APATHY
Political apathy refers to individuals not voting in elections because they feel like their
participation will not make a difference.
Political apathy can be defined as the situation where the majority of the populace show an
attitude of apathy or lack of interest towards politics. It is usually a case where a person shows
no interest in the matters and state of politics in his or her country. This means that he or she
does not care about political parties, politicians, electoral processes, and even governance as a
whole.
Political apathy may be in three forms or types
a. Apathy due to lack of information.
b. Apathy due to lack of interest.
c. Voter apathy.
Reasons for Political Apathy
What Are the Causes of Political Apathy in America
1. Belief That Vote Does not Count: Many Americans have doubts that their vote will be
counted or that it even matters. When following election returns, they may see that their state has
been declared for a candidate and think, "Why bother?" According to a poll by the "Daily
Nebraskan," many members of Generation X and Y see the government as so far removed, they
feel like one person cannot make a difference.
2. Dislike of Politicians: Some people don't vote because of the negative opinion they have of
politicians. A 2011 survey from the Pew Research Center found that 69 percent of Americans
believe that politicians don't care what average Americans think and 72 percent say that, once
elected, politicians lose touch with the voters back home. Part of this dislike comes from the
number of scandals at all levels of government involving politicians of both parties. Other people
believe that politicians will say anything to get elected and once in office, don't represent their
31
interests.
3. Lack of Variety in Candidates: When choosing a new president, senator or representative to
Congress, voters typically have to choose between candidates from two parties. Unlike in the
past, when economic issues defined the parties and divided the voters, the Democrat and
Republican parties must deal with many larger issues and don't enjoy the voter loyalty they once
had. This decrease in party loyalty leads to voter apathy because, for some people, neither the
Democrat nor Republican option reflects their beliefs.
4. Lack of Trust in Government: Many Americans have lost faith in government. They don't
trust the government to make the changes they feel are needed and don't see the point in voting
or being involved. Laws and programs that benefit corporations and the wealthy have left
citizens feeling frustrated and helpless.
5. Hyper-Critical Negative Media: Negative political news coverage and negative political ads
create cynicism in many Americans, which leads to apathy. News programs do not provide
substantive coverage of candidates and their views on issues, offering instead sound clips and
opinions from biased panelists. As negative political ads become more mean-spirited and
distorted, some Americans get disgusted and completely disconnect from the political process.
Reasons for Political Apathy in Nigeria
1. Rigging of Elections: This is a major reason for the growing political apathy in Nigeria. Over
the years, elections have been plagued with rigging and malpractices. And that is why most
Nigerians don’t believe in elections. The popular belief that the votes do not count. Most
Nigerians believe that their votes do not count. This is one of the main reasons why a lot of
Nigerian always refuse to turn out for voters registration. And during elections, most decide to
stay back at home because of the general feeling and belief that their votes will have no impact
on the outcome of the election.
2. Lack of credible candidate: Since the beginning of the post-military era, there has been a
continuous cycle of politicians. People do not have so many options from which they vote.
3. Current condition of governance: This is probably the number one reason for political
apathy in Nigeria. The government has failed to provide good leadership and governance for the
country, as a result, the level of apathy towards politics and governance has increased.
4. Lack of trust in governance: This is different from the dislike of politicians. In this case, this
is an issue of not believing in the way of governance and lacking the interest to see governance
32
improve. Most people also have lost hope of better governance and therefore a reason for their
political apathy.
5. Campaign violence: Due to the level of violence that always occur during the build-up to
elections, most people stay away from electoral process for the safety of their lives. Also, the
violence was seen during campaign always damage the credibility of most political parties and
their candidates among the people. And because of this, the level of political apathy keeps
growing.
6. Chaos in the Political System: In Nigeria today, there is so much chaos going in politics and
in the government. They include political oppression and victimization, political infighting, etc.
7. Weak Security Measures During Elections: Most people believe that their votes are not
secured during elections. This is as a result of the history of election rigging, snatching of ballot
boxes, disruption of voting centres by thugs, etc. And as a result, people don’t participate in the
voting process.
8. Negative Media Coverage: There is a lot of negative media coverage of politics and
governance which builds up disinterest among voter.
The most common is lack of interest and voter apathy. Political apathy in Nigeria is expressed in
so many different ways:
a. Many Nigerians refuse to belong to or support any political party.
b. The low turn-out of Nigerians who are eligible to vote for the voters’ registration process.
c. The poor turn-out of voters during elections.
d. Most Nigerians are not interested in protesting against bad governance and leadership in
the country.

Effects of Political Apathy

a. Politicians are not held accountable for their actions.
b. Continued imbalance of power can lead to civil wars and revolutions.
c. High level of corruption and lawlessness flourish in the country.
d. Greedy politicians keep getting into power.
e. The development of the country becomes very slows.

Definitions of Elections
33
Although elections are fundamental and very common in modern political discourse and there is
hardly any dispute about their meaning, they have, like many other social science concepts, been
discussed from several perspectives. In what follows we consider some of the definitions
A good one to begin with is the definition by R. Dowse and J. Hughes (1972) who assert that
“Elections are one type of social mechanism, amongst others, for aggregating preferences of a
particular kind. An election is, therefore, a procedure recognized by the rules of an organization,
be it a state, a club, a voluntary organization or whatever, where all, or some, of the members
choose a smaller number of persons to hold an office, or offices, of authority within that
organization’'.
By analysis, this definition assumes that every political organization is democratic, and goes
through the mechanism of elections in arriving at the smaller number of leaders that hold her
offices. It is quite easy to describe this definition as impressionistic and hastily generalizing,
considering the fact that it was given in 1972 when only about forty two percent of world’s
nations were democratic and produced their leaders through elections.
Ball, A. (1977) can be accused of similar thing based on his definition that “elections are the
means by which the people choose and exercise some degree of control over their
representatives”. This simply suggests that wherever people are chosen to lead other people, the
mechanism used is election.

Characteristics of Elections
It is quite important for the behavioral scientist to clarify that to the extent that there are many
forms of political system, ranging from monarchy, to totalitarianism, election is not, and cannot
be the only way of choosing political leaders. The work however, is made easier as it limits the
scope of elections to government at the level of the state. We shall discuss the circumstances of
election in government in the following part.
Electoral System: Elections often hold under clearly defined electoral system.
Suffrage: The electorate does not generally include the entire population; for example, many
countries prohibit those judged mentally incompetent from voting, and all jurisdictions require a
minimum age for voting. While in Nigeria the voting age is 18, in other countries it is sixteen.
Used in Democracy: Because democracy is often regarded as government of the people by the
people and for the people, election is often the main mechanism used to endure that leadership is

34
 arrived at based on the wish of the people. Under democracy, election often means majority,
mostly in number and sometimes in agreed forms of representation. In democratic systems,
elections are based on certain electoral systems that are products of the evolution and history of
the society. In the electoral system voting pattern, vote counting and winner declaration are the
main issue. While we can have major electoral systems as proportional and majoritarian, other
ones include party-list proportional representation, additional member system, First Past the Post
(otherwise called relative majority) and absolute majority.
Used in Constitutional Monarchy: Elections are also used in constitutional monarchies where
leadership is not arrived at through voting, but heredity, but, at the same time, operations of
leaders are subjected to certain constitutional provisions. Elections in this type of political
arrangement may not therefore necessarily follow any of the identified electoral systems
Periodicity Elections come periodically. While in certain countries they are held every four
years as in the United States and Nigeria, other countries use five or six years. Nigeria at present
is proposing six years single term for political office holders. Whatever it is, the period of
elections is often also contained in a government’s constitution.
Functions of Elections
(a) Political Recruitment
Elections provide people of a political community with the opportunity to vote and be voted for
in the process of choosing representatives in government. This process is systematized, and it
provides, at least in theory, platform for fair participation of many people. Perhaps without
elections, only one family or clique will dominate political offices in a political community.
(b) Peaceful Transfer of Power
This systematization of recruitment process in elections is open and competitive, and therefore
promises to eliminate unwarranted grudges and agitation. This means that elections provide the
basis for the orderly and peaceful transfer of power in a political system. It facilitates crisis free
political succession if the rules guiding it are followed.
(c) Interest Articulation
During elections people are able to articulate their political interest either as individual
candidates where allowed by the constitution, or as representative of a political party. Interest
articulation is a very vital aspect of the workings of a political system.
(d) Interest Aggregation
35
 As political interests and preferences differ in politics, elections help to aggregate them in
political communities. It is through elections that the views and opinions of people are organized,
translated and consolidated into definitive electoral choices and mandates that will eventually
produce leaders and representatives at different levels.
(e) Enhancement of Political Equality
Elections are very good means of are a means of bringing together the rich and the poor before
the ballot box, making them equal at least for that moment, in their duties of politics. But for a
mechanism like elections, the poor may never have any opportunity to mix up with the rich at all,
especially in highly stratified societies.

(f) Citizens’ Control of Government

Major role that elections play is provide means and mechanisms through which the people who
are governed can influence the ways those who govern them conduct themselves. It is one sure
way among “violence, in the form of riots and political assassination, and the exercise of
pressure groups influence" through which, as Dowse and Hughes (1972) puts is, “the governors
are controlled”.
(g) Sense of Political Community
Elections help to integrate people into a strong sense of community spirit through the interaction
it provides. This can assist a people in ameliorating contradictions such as ethnicity, religious
dichotomy and indigene settler rivalry as we have in Nigeria and other parts of the world.
(i) Extra Party Political Participation
Elections often provide the opportunity for people outside political parties to participate in the
political system, while enabling the government to lay claim to some degree of popular support
or legitimacy. This is particularly so in one-party states where competition for elective offices
is dominated and even controlled by the only political party, and where the people merely
support candidates chosen, or reject him or her if they like. They alone do not have direct choice.
(j) Political Communication
Conduct of elections also ensures political communication between the citizens and those who
govern them. People of a country, during electioneering campaigns have ample opportunities to
ask their leaders how they have governed them over years. Without this kind of opportunity,
governance will be esoteric and clandestine, and democracy will be reduced to conspiracy.
36
 ELECTION AND ELECTORAL SYSTEM
Election and Electoral system to many scholars are dialectically opposed in terms of concept and
content, while election presupposes a process of determining representation, electoral system on
the other hands, presupposes a rule guiding the process. In this perspective this process of
representation can take the following forms:
i. Referendum
ii. Plebiscite
iii. Open Ballot
iv. Secret Ballot
v. Open cum Secret Ballot
The choice of methodology in term of election is largely dictated through the instrumentality of
the electoral system. It is also be noted that the process of representation can also be a function
of the regime-type, that is, in a democracy, the process of representation finds expression in what
is referred to as electoral act. Under a democracy, the political arrangement is anchored on more
than the existence of one party, in this perspective; a multi-party arrangement is a popular feature
in the process of representation in a democracy.
For instance in the ancient Greek, political arrangement were structured along the lines of city-
state and the choice of representation was largely based on either referendum or plebiscite.
Consequently a departure from referendum and plebiscite was necessitated by increase in
population, the choice from moving from plebiscite or referendum to other forms of
representation was also occasioned by the observers of natural justice. It is also argued that, the
choice of representation in a one-party state is antithetically different to what obtains in a
democracy. In the United State of America, the choice of representation and the attendant
methodology are carely expressed by the congress. For instance, the presidential election in the
United State of America is largely determined by the electoral college while presidential election
in a democracy like Nigeria is anchored on popular franchise.
PLEBISCITE: A system by which everyone in a country votes to decide a matter of national
importance.

37
REFERENDUM: An occasion when everyone in a country votes in order to take a decision
about a particular subject.
Referendum and Plebiscite
A referendum is a provision that permits the voters to either accept or reject a policy question or
a public policy measure at a formal election.
Referendums cannot always be used to give further decision making power to the authorities.
Plebiscites, however, are sometimes used for the sole purpose of legitimizing a particular
government decision by the people who would otherwise oppose it. This is also the reason
behind the fact that although referendums might be used frequently, plebiscites are used rarely,
in situations where the government is desperate that their proposal is not rejected.
A referendum (plural: referendums or less commonly referenda) is a direct vote by the electorate
on a proposal, law, or political issue. This is in contrast to an issue being voted on by a
representative. This may result in the adoption of a new policy or specific law, or the referendum
may be only advisory.
Plebiscite is a vote by the people of an entire country or district to decide on some issue, such as
choice of a ruler or government, option for independence or annexation by another power, or a
question of national policy.
In a plebiscite, voters are asked not to choose between alternate regimes or proposals but to
confirm or reject the legitimacy of a certain form of government or course of action. Plebiscites
are seen as a way for a government to go directly to the people, bypassing intermediaries such as
political parties.
A plebiscite offers a way of claiming a popular mandate without officially sanctioning an
opposition party, totalitarian regimes also use them to legitimize their power.
Main Differences Between a Plebiscite and a Referendum
1. A plebiscite occurs only for an undemocratic environment, and on the other hand, a
referendum occurs only in a democratic environment.
2. A plebiscite brings in a feeling of unity and empowerment in the government, and on the
other hand, a referendum brings a feeling of empowerment within the people.
3. The technique of legitimate a policy by the government is called a plebiscite, and on the
other hand, the way of getting a stronger opinion in masses in a country is known as a
referendum.
38
 4. A plebiscite can be carried out only by some specific authority of people at the high post,
and on the other hand, a referendum can be carried out by a citizen or a group of people
having the same motto.
5. A plebiscite is a way of voting by itself, and on the other hand, a referendum is a way of
phrasing the vote.

Elections represent such a fundamental and common feature of political life that there is hardly
any dispute about their meaning actual or potential functions.
Alan Ball describes elections as “the means by which the people choose and exercise some
degree of control over their representatives” R. Dowse and J. Hughes have defined elections
more elaborately as follows. “Elections are one type of social mechanism, amongst others, for
aggregating preferences of a particular kind. An election is, therefore a procedure recognised by
the rules of an organisation, be it state, a club, a voluntary organisation or whatever, where all, or
some of the members choose a smaller number of person to hold an office, or offices, of
authority within that organisation: Election is the art of making a choice through vote.

ROLES OF ELECTION
1. They provide an opportunity for the people to choose their representatives and, in most
cases, to be chosen as representatives themselves means of political recruitment.
2. They provide the basis for the orderly and peaceful transfer of power in a political
system.
3. Elections can perform a legitimacy or regime-approving function.
4. Elections also help to aggregate political preferences. They organise, consolidate and
translate the views and opinions of the citizens into definitive electoral choices and
mandates
5. Elections enhance political equality.
6. Elections may also help to create a sense of political community-elections can help to
integrate the citizens in a common or national political process and thus give them a
shared sense of belonging in the polity.
7. Elections represent one of the methods or mechanisms by which the governed can
influence the conduct of the governors.

39
8. Elections are also a form of political communication between the government and citizen.
They provide a mean by which political decision-makers become sensitive to the
electorate’s political demands, and in turn are in a position to “educate” the electorate on
important political issues.

APPROACHES TO THE STUDY OF ELECTIONS

1. THE NUFFIELD APPROACH: This approach focuses on the wider national political
and historical context of the election under study. It tries to examine the main issues in
the elections, the character of the electoral campaign, the number and nature of the
political parties involved, and the historical background of the various constituencies,
parities and candidates.
2. THE CASE – STUDY APPROACH: This approach relies on intensive case studies of
small areas a single constituency, town or district in order to obtain a clearer picture of
mass reaction to and participation in the elections.
3. THE SAMPLE SURVEY APPROACH: The approach relies heavily on quantitative
techniques and is based on the use of sample surveys or the collection and analysis of
electoral data derived from a small but very representative section of the national
population. More sophisticated, more scientific and more reliable than the two mentioned
above.
4. THE SYSTEM APPROACH: It is primarily concerned with the functional impact of
the election on the wider political system than with the election itself. The approach
focuses essentially on the structural function such as political legitimation, recruitment
and communication which an electoral event may perform for a given political system
rather than on the autonomous importance of the electoral event itself.

STRATEGIES AND MEANS FOR FREE AND FAIR ELECTION

1. Existence of independent electoral body appointment of an impartial body to conduct
election.
2. Electoral division of the state
3. Provision of choice
4. Election must be free and fair
5. Keeping of up-to-date register of voters
40
 6. Provision of independent Judicial body
7. Respect for electoral laws
8. Periodic election
9. There must be universal adult suffrage

ELECTORAL SYSTEM
Electoral system is the method or methods adopted to get people elected into the legislative or
government. That is, it is the general procedure and process of elections of persons into the
legislative of a state. It is the business of a sound electoral system to make provisions for the
ways of determining candidates for election. Electoral system can be through;
a. Adult suffrage
b. Male suffrage
c. Property suffrage
d. Tax payer suffrage
e. Electoral college

FACTORS AFFECTING FREE AND FAIR ELECTION

1. Lack of an independent electoral commission
2. Absence of accurate population census
3. Poor communication system
4. Inequality in the finance of the candidates
5. One party rule
6. Poor administrative system
7. Illegal compilation of separate voter’s list
8. Illegal printing of voter’s cards and possession of ballot boxes

MAJORITARIAN SYSTEM: This system is based on the principle that a candidate or party
that wins an election must have secured total vote greater than the addition of all the votes cast
for other candidates or parties put together.
That is, Total Vote of A - 500
B - 150
C - 100
D - 80
41
A = 500 and B, C and D = 330

PLURAL SYSTEM OR WINNER – TAKES – ALL- SYSTEM: Under this system, a

candidate is declared winner when his total votes in election is greater than the votes of each of
the candidates or parties in election.
Example: Candidate A - 400, 000
B - 350, 000
C - 300, 000
Total votes 1, 050, 000
Then candidates “A” is declared winner

PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATIVE SYSTEM: This method is adopted in order to

enable every section of the community to be represented in the legislative in proportion to its
strength. This is always through (i) Single – Transferable vote and list system
Election
An election is a formal group decision-making process by which a population chooses an
individual or multiple individuals to hold public office.
Elections have been the usual mechanism by which modern representative democracy has
operated since the 17th century. Elections may fill offices in the legislature, sometimes in the
executive and judiciary, and for regional and local government. This process is also used in
many other private and business organisations, from clubs to voluntary associations and
corporations.
The global use of elections as a tool for selecting representatives in modern representative
democracies is in contrast with the practice in the democratic archetype, ancient Athens, where
the elections were considered an oligarchic institution and most political offices were filled using
sortition, also known as allotment, by which officeholders were chosen by lot.
Electoral reform describes the process of introducing fair electoral systems where they are not in
place, or improving the fairness or effectiveness of existing systems. Psephology is the study of
results and other statistics relating to elections (especially with a view to predicting future
results). Election is the fact of electing, or being elected.
To elect means "to select or make a decision", and so sometimes other forms of ballot such as
referendums are referred to as elections, especially in the United States.
42
Electoral systems are the detailed constitutional arrangements and voting systems that convert
the vote into a political decision. The first step is to tally the votes, for which various vote
counting systems and ballot types are used. Voting systems then determine the result on the basis
of the tally. Most systems can be categorized as either proportional, majoritarian or mixed.
Among the proportional systems, the most commonly used are party-list proportional
representation (list PR) systems, among majoritarian are First Past the Post electoral system
(plurality, also known as relative majority) and absolute majority. Mixed systems combine
elements of both proportional and majoritarian methods, with some typically producing results
closer to the former (mixed-member proportional) or the other (e.g. parallel voting). Many
countries have growing electoral reform movements, which advocate systems such as approval
voting, single transferable vote, instant runoff voting or a Condorcet method; these methods are
also gaining popularity for lesser elections in some countries where more important elections still
use more traditional counting methods.
While openness and accountability are usually considered cornerstones of a democratic system,
the act of casting a vote and the content of a voter's ballot are usually an important exception.
The secret ballot is a relatively modern development, but it is now considered crucial in most
free and fair elections, as it limits the effectiveness of intimidation.

Public Opinion
Public opinion, an aggregate of the individual views, attitudes, and beliefs about a particular
topic, expressed by a significant proportion of a community. Some scholars treat the aggregate as
a synthesis of the views of all or a certain segment of society; others regard it as a collection of
many differing or opposing views.
The American political scientist V.O. Key defined public opinion in 1961 as “opinions held by
private persons which governments find it prudent to heed.”
Public opinion represents people’s collective preferences on matters related to government and
politics.
Public opinion can be viewed as the collection of individual opinions, where all opinions deserve
equal treatment regardless of whether the individuals expressing them are knowledgeable about
an issue or not. Thus, public opinion is the aggregation of preferences of people from all
segments of society.
43
Public opinion is primarily a political opinion that concerns the collective life of people.
In simple words we can say that public opinion is neither the opinion of all
nor it is the majority opinion. It is an opinion which is generally held by all
and its purpose is to highlight the welfare of all. It is a consensus opinion
which enjoys the support of a very large majority of people. It is not even
opposed by the minorities as it reflects a concern for the welfare of all.
According to Kimball Young (1946) public opinion consists of opinions held by a public at a
certain time.
V.V. Akolkar remarks that public opinion refers to that mass of ideas which people have or
express on a given issue.
According to Kupuswamy, public opinion consists of opinions held by people of a smaller or a
larger community about a particular problem at a certain time.

Public opinion is always characterised by the following features:

1. General Agreement: It is an opinion behind which there is a general agreement or a
consensus.
2. Rational/Logical: Public opinion is rational. It is logical. Its validity can be demonstrated
by logic or reason.
3. General Welfare: Public opinion is always governed by the idea of promotion of general
public welfare.
4. Related to all aspect of life: Public opinion can concern any and every matter- Political,
Social, Economic, or Cultural.
5. Upholds Morality: Public opinion always upholds the moral values of society. It is never
against morality.
6. Not an Imposed Opinion: Public opinion is not an imposed opinion. It is a generally held
consensus opinion and is the result of growth.
7. Neither Destructive nor Negative: Public opinion is never destructive and negative. It is
positive in content because it always represents public welfare.
8. Based on Right to Freedom of Speech and Expression: The right to freedom of speech
and expression is the most essential condition for the birth of public opinion.
9. Basis of Democracy: Public opinion plays a deterministic role in a democracy. All
44
policies of a democratic government rest upon public opinion. The government can remain in
power and work successfully only when it is backed by public opinion.
10. Real Sanction behind Laws of the State: Public opinion is the real sanction behind all
laws and policies of a democratic state. Supremacy of public opinion reflects the sovereignty
of people, which is the very basis of a democracy.

45
MEASUREMENT OF PUBLIC OPINION
Public opinion can be measured in the following ways:
1. It can be measured through mass media such as television, newspaper, magazines and
other public conversations.
2. It can be measured through people or public reactions to certain issues.
3. Another way of measuring public opinion is through the conduct of election especially
referendum.
4. It can be measured through interviewing or distributing questionnaires to the people and
getting their opinions.
5. It can also be measured through the dissemination of information or circulation of
rumours or gossip.

THE WEAKNESS OF PUBLIC OPINION

The weaknesses of public opinions are itemized below:
Lack of sufficient information: At times, people lack sufficient information on certain issues
and as such, are not capable of forming a rational opinion.
Technicality of matters: In a situation where specialized and technical matters are to be treated,
the majority of people are not qualified to express an opinion.
Another weakness of public opinion is that it has been accused of being erratic, inconsistent and
conservation in nature.
Propaganda: Political propaganda agencies constitute problem to the achievement of public
opinion.
Complexity of society: Also, because of the complexity of society, more and more people or
groups stand out distinctly from the public opinion.

POLITICAL COMMUNICATION
Political communication(s): Is a subfield of communication and political science that is
concerned with how information spreads and influences politics, policy makers, the news media,
and citizens. Since the advent of the World Wide Web, the amount of data to analyze has
exploded and researchers are shifting to computational methods to study the dynamics of
political communication. In recent years, machine learning, natural language processing, and
network analysis have become key tools in the subfield. It deals with the production,
46
dissemination, procession and effects of information, both through mass media and
interpersonally, within a political context. This includes the study of the media, the analysis of
speeches by politicians, those that are trying to influence the political process, and the formal and
informal conversations among members of the public, among other aspects. The media acts as a
bridge between government and public. Political communication can be defined as the
connection concerning politics and citizens and the interaction modes that connect these groups
to each other. Whether the relationship is formed by the modes of persuasion, Pathos, Ethos or
Logos.
Political communication is an interactive process concerning the transmission of information
among politicians, the news media, and the public. The process operates downward from
governing institutions toward citizens, horizontally in linkages among political actors, and also
upward from public opinion toward authorities. Political communication has always been central
to the electoral and policymaking process but since the early 1990s certain important
developments have fundamentally altered this process, particularly postwar trends in the mass
media moving from the traditional world of newspapers, radio, and television broadcasting
toward the Internet.
Political communication concerns the creation and exchange of ideas and opinions between
citizens, public officials, political institutions, and related entities, such as the media. It includes
discourse throughout the political process in local, state, national, and international political
systems, as well as how information and rhetoric can be leveraged for political gain or to achieve
political goals. Individuals with a bachelor’s and/or a master’s in political communication might
work in political consulting, foreign service, market research, public relations, journalism and
digital media, community organization, lobbying, political campaigning, or other related fields.
The study and practice of communication focuses on the ways and means of expression of a
political nature. Robert E. Denton and Gary C. Woodward, two important contributors to the
field of Political Communication in America, characterize it as the ways and intentions of
message senders to influence the political environment. This includes public discussion (e.g.
political speeches, news media coverage, and ordinary citizens' talk) that considers who has
authority to sanction the allocation of public resources, who has authority to make decisions, as
well as social meaning like what makes someone American. In their words, "the crucial factor
that makes communication 'political' is not the source of a message, but its content and purpose."
47
David L. Swanson and Dan Nimmo, also key members of this sub-discipline, define political
communication as "the strategic use of communication to influence public knowledge, beliefs,
and action on political matters." They emphasize the strategic nature of political communication,
highlighting the role of persuasion in political discourse. Brian McNair provides a similar
definition when he writes that political communication is "purposeful communication about
politics." For McNair, this means that this not only covers verbal or written statements, but also
visual representations such as dress attire, make-up, hairstyle or logo design. In other words, it
also includes all those aspects that develop a "political identity" or "image".
Reflecting on the relationship between political communication and contemporary agenda-
building, Vian Bakir defines Strategic Political Communication (SPC) as comprising 'political
communication that is manipulative in intent, utilizes social scientific techniques and heuristic
devices to understand human motivation, human behavior and the media environment in order to
inform effectively what should be communicated – encompassing its detail and overall direction
– and what should be withheld, with the aim of taking into account and influencing public
opinion, and creating strategic alliances and an enabling environment for government policies –
both at home and abroad'.
There are many academic departments and schools around the world that specialize in political
communication. These programs are housed in programs of communication, journalism and
political science, among others. The study of political communication is clearly interdisciplinary.
Strategic communication "which is defined as the purposeful use of communication by an
organization to fulfill its mission." In this case, the organization (political leaders) use campaigns
as their form of communicating and advocacy in order to obtain support from their countries
people whether it is for ethical or reasons or not.
Effective communicators are vital to the political process, helping to contextualize understanding
of issues at all levels of discourse. They are central players, who help politicians run for office,
develop policies and legislation for the social good, educate the general public on socio-political
issues, and promote greater participation in democracy. Career options vary, but here are a few
potential career paths graduates of master’s programs in political communication might consider:
1. Campaign Strategist: Campaign strategists use their knowledge of local, state, national,
and international politics; the social issues facing different sectors of the American
population; effective campaign media; and speech writing to plan and implement political
48
 campaign strategies. Campaign strategists might work for a specific politician seeking
election, or be employed by a political party, independent non-profit, or for-profit
organization to help develop campaign materials for a particular political or social cause.
2. Government Press Secretary: Press secretaries manage public relations for government
organizations, including local, state, and federal entities. They develop relationships with
journalists and media outlets, as well as write and edit press releases and update news
outlets on certain events or political developments that are relevant to the public. Using
political communication tactics, they tailor their messaging to the public in order to
maintain transparency while also staying consistent with their employers’ desired public
image.
3. Political Journalist: Political journalists conduct investigations of social and political
issues that are of interest to the public, and write articles on their findings. Their mission
is to both inform the public and hold local, state, and federal governments accountable for
their actions.
4. Government Communication Director: Communication directors promote the political
agendas and craft the public image of organizations that employ them through careful
strategies, including speech writing and editing, media campaigns, and collaborations
with policy makers to develop announcements of new legislation or government
programs.
5. Lobbyist: Working on behalf of multinational corporations, universities, community
organizations, or other groups, lobbyists develop relationships with elected officials at the
local, state, and national level to promote legislation that is beneficial to their employer’s
interests.
6. College Professor: Political communication professors teach undergraduate- and
graduate-level courses at both four-year universities and community or junior colleges. In
addition to working with students, they often conduct original research or write scholarly
articles on topics in political communication, with the intent to advance theory or
scholarship in the field.

49
Political Culture
Political culture is defined as "the composition of attitudes, beliefs. emotions and values of a
society that relate to the political system and to political issues". This suggests the totality of the
ways of life of a people as transferred into their political behaviours.
The term political culture was borrowed form Talcott Parson particularly form his book, titled
"Towards a General Theory of Social Actions". In this book. he argued that cultural patterns can
be viewed as both objects of orientations and elements of it. That is, an internalized components
of an action.
Political culture. technically. was for the :its: time used around 1956 by Almond in his article -
"Comparative Political System". To him. "every political system is embeded in a pattern of
orientations of political actions and I have found it useful to refer to it as a political culture"
(Almond and Coalman 1956).
In Almond and Verba's comparative study of Great Britain, United States of America, Mexico.
Germany and Italy) the concept, political culture was generously employed.
In this study, political culture was seen as political orientation attitude, values and beliefs
towards political system as held by the citizens of a pariticular state. The political cutlure of a
nation, they argued is a perculiar distribution of a pattern of orientations towards political objects
and the political objects from the political system.
Political culture is also defined by the Encyclopaedia of social sciences as "the set of attitudes.
beliefs and sentiments which give order and meaning to a political assumption and rules that
govern behaviour in the political system. It encompasses both the political ideas and the
operating norms of a polity"
Political culture therefore deals with the evolution of the political ideals and norms of a society
the attitudes, beliefs and sentiments which govern behaviour within a political system.

A study of political culture therefore is a study of what people of a country perceive on;
i. power, In acquisition and uses:
ii. authority in its agents;
iii. criteria for legitimization of the political elites;
iv. system of conflict resolution within the system; and,
v. self as part of the system

50
Classification of Political Culture
It is usually difficult to make a neat classification of different political cultures of the countries in
the world. This is due to the fact that political culture vanes from one country to another Also, it
is equally difficult to talk of homogenous political culture for any country. What is always true
of most countries is a mixture of several pasterns as transferred into political behaviour of the
people.
However, in counties with cleavages or marked differences, political cultures tend to have
political sub-cultures.

Political culture can however be classified according to;

i. whether or not member of the society take an active role in the political process and
expect benefits twin governmental activities:
ii. whether or not there is a passive relationship in which individuals know very little about
government activities and do not expect to share In decision making:
iii. the attitudes of the people to the political institutions of the state;
iv. the attitudes to sources of political powers and authority and:
v. the degree of bust which the people have on political leadership and to other political
actors In feint of their obedience to the rules of the political game.

The classification of political culture which has received wide acceptability was propounded by
Almond and Verba 17963. The three types of political cultures propounded by Almond and
Verba are:-
(a) Parochial political culture,
(b) Subject political culture and
(c) Participant political culture

In using these divisions, they argued that a political culture of a nation is the different kinds of
cognitive, affective and evaluative orientations of people toward their political system.

(1) Parochial Political Culture

This exists where majority of the people within the system have zero knowledge of the political
system, its outputs, in forms of laws, orders, instructions and they don’t know how to evaluate
51
political outputs and how to input their needs or demands into the political system.

Most developing countries are said to have parochial political culture because many of their
people have little or no knowledge of the institutions of government, government policies, and
they don’t see themselves as capable of influencing political actors or governmental policies and
programmes. This description is true of some parts of Nigeria.

(2) Subject Political culture

Under this heading, majority of the citizens know about the institutions, the incumbents of the
offices of the State (Ministers, Senators, Governors, Presidents etc) and their frequencies of
orientation to political system and out-put are high but their orientation towards input is zero.
This means that the people are aware of those actors running the government, their rules and
regulations but do not know that they could influence policy decisions. They obey their leaders
unquestionably but have poor evaluation of self when it comes to influencing government
policies. The Russians and citizens of the communist bloc have been classified was people with
subject political culture.

(3) Participant Political Culture

This is a political culture in which members of the society are explicitly oriented to the system as
a whole and to both the political and the administrative structures and processes. That is, citizens
are perfectly oriented to the sown, as a whole and to both the input (demands and supports) and
to the outputs (laws, orders and instructions).
In addition, people are properly oriented to the political system generally and also towards
positive self. Under this typology, people know their rights and are usually willing and ready to
participate in the political processes (U.S.A and Britain are examples of countries with this
typology).
The picture of three typologies of political culture as presented above are in their pure forms. In
other word, no political system in the world can exhibit any of these types of political cultures in
their pure forms. They are just ideal constructs. The implication of this observation is that all
political cultures are often mixed up with one another within any political system. It is therefore
wrong to talk of any country having a typical political culture.

It is however, common to have the following types of mixtures in many countries.

52
(a) Parochial Subject Political Cultures:
Under this mixture. majority of the people have allegiance to the more complex political system
with specialized central Government. Examples are Bangladesh. Brune/Burma Cambodia. and so
on.

(b) Subject Participant Political Culture.

In this political culture, a substantial part of the population acquired specialized input orientation,
while the remaining part continued to be part of the authoritative orientation and they have
passive sets of self-orientation. Examples of countries under this category of political culture are
Germany. France and Italy.

(c) Parochial Participant Political Culture:

Under this category, majority of the people within it are predominantly parochial. “The structural
forms that have been introduced are usually parochial. The problem here is how to develop
specialized inputs and output orientation. Election under this system is unnecessary as this is
only useful to participant oriented culture. This category of political culture is particularly
common in developing nation-states.

POLITICAL SOCIALIZATION
Meaning of Political Socialization
A number of definitions of political socialization have been used by political researchers.
Political socialization to some of them is seen as a process through which citizens acquire views
of political world. It is a cultural transmission of political norms and values to ensure inter-
conformity in political life.
Aristotle looked at political socialization as developmental training through which the citizen
grows and matures. Therefore, through political socialization, a political self is formed. A
political self is made and not born.
Political socialization provides answers to questions like:

How is the child introduced to the world of politics?

How does the child perceive citizen's roles? How is he attached emotionally to the political

53
community? How do individuals learn the attitudes. beliefs; and values they hold about politics?
How do they learn difficult roles in politics? and so on. Political socialization is therefore a
developmental process through which the child mature politically. The process may encourage
and reinforce loyalty to the nation, foster particular values, patriotism. party identification; self-
image of right responsibility and individual consciousness of one's role in the political world.

Major Characteristics of Political Socialization

1. It is a gradual and Incremental process: That is, political socialization is a life-long
experience.

2. It is cumulative: This means that early orientation greatly influences what is later
acquired in life. The basic orientations and loyalties which are acquired in early life
are strong and most difficult to change in later life. Political socialisation is
therefore. a process which provides the individual with his/her political-sell as
he/she advances through childhood, adolescence and adulthood.
3. It transmits and shapes the political value as a whole: That is, it maintains,
transforms and creates the political culture of a nation. For performance, most
developing countries face the problem of nation-building because of the existence
and adherence to sectional and ethnic loyalty. This problem can only be solved
through effective political socialization. Through these conscious efforts. a new
culture would be created which will erode sectional or ethnic loyalties of the people.
4. Political socialization involves series of social and Psychological processes: Man is
not reared in isolation. he is gregarious and he is a political animal. Man is born into
an on-going society with existing norms, structures and patterns of behaviours which
he must understand and make to guide his behaviour.

Therefore, it is necessary to recognise that socialization is an interaction processes. It is

also a process in which the individuals and agencies play important roles. As a
continuous process it is an experience acquired from the cradle to the grave.
Meanwhile, it is at this stage necessary to further discuss the stages of political
socialization and its major agents
Stages of Political Socialization

54
 Political socialization in most people begins early in tile and continues until very old age
or death. The processes however, vary from one person to another and from one culture or
sub-culture to another
However, the following represents the developmental cycle in general terms. Political
socialization starts at the age of three or four years when the child first perceives basic
political objects. Examples of these political objects are the Governor. President.
Policemen, which are seen as somehow different from the child's family or his
neighbours. He also Mans to sing the national anthem or recite the national pledge, even,
when he might not understand the meaning of the word and essence of the anthem or
pledge. At the age of seven, many children have started to have party preferences (Ranny,
1975) It is common at this stage of life to hear something like -vote for SDP or NRC" by
children under this age group

The cycle may be divided into:

(i) Childhood period (2 -13 years)
(ii) Adolescence stage (13 -18 years)
(iii) Adulthood stage (18 years and above)

(a) Childhood Period

Political education starts at the age of 3 years. From the age of six to age of eighteen, a typical
child is in the public school and his political world has started to change and it will undergo the
most rapid changes during these years. His emotional attachment to the political community,
politics. authorities are all acquired within the family before admission into primary school.
However, peer-groups, formal learning in the school, usually help the child to have increasing
clarity of what he had already acquired at home.

(b) Adolescence Stage

This is a transition period from childhood to adulthood. It is a critical period in the life of an
individual. During this period, the tendency to join voluntary organisations, discuss politics,
express views on many social values by most adolescents are very high. It needs to be stressed
here that the views held by these young people may be unrealistic and in many cases, hardly
could stand the test of time. These are like mirage. They are usually tentative and solved so
55
change with experience.

(c) Adulthood Stage of Life

This is a period when a typical person acquired on ever-increasing interest and stake in his state.
The laws, instructions, orders, budgetary allocations and many other government policies
become very important and relevant so him He has completed his formal education takes a job or
establishes his own business, marries, wants to own a house, car and consequently or perhaps
runs into debts. Because of all these problems and changes in his life: He is ever more concerned
with what the governments do or fail to do. He is now political & conscious joins is political
parties, religious organizations, clubs and he is more likely to vote during elections or stand as
candidate for elective post.

(d) Old Age

It is difficult to conclude or state when political old age begins. It is however, easy to assert that
with increasing infirmities of our Senior Citizens, many of them, may exhibit a decline in general
social and economic involvements. It is however, true that even at the age of seventy and above,
some "Senior citizens' still vote substantially more than the twenty – five olds. What is not
contestable, however, is that with advancement in age, political participation or socialization is at
a considerably low rate for most people during old age.

METHODS OF POLITICAL LEARNING

Political education can take the forms to direct or indirect method socialization. Each of these
methods is raised for discussion as follows:

Indirect Political Learning:

By this method we mean the acquisition of non-political pre-dispositions which are transferred
into political objects. Under this method of political learning, the following are noteworthy;
(a) Inter-Personal Transfer
This is the initial exposure which a child has in the family and which may later guide or be
transformed into his political behaviour and belief tater in life. Relevant example here is the
authoritarian or democratic pre-disposition that a child learns in the family, usually through the
lathes as in most African societies.
56
(b) Apprenticeship
The non-political experiences acquired by the individual give him skills and insight into to
political life in future. Many of these activities are regarded as apprenticeship to political roles.
Participation in family derision, clubs, societies, gives the individuals some experience which ate
put into use in later tile.

(c) Generalization
This is another example of indirect political learning. The kind of political attitudes developed by
an individual such as social values ate later extended to political objects. Some of these are social
trust, tolerance, inter personal co-operation. All these are later extended by individuals to
political life.
Agents of Political Socialization
The principal agents of the development and establishment of various attitudes values and beliefs
about political system are:
(a) the family:
(b) the schools and other educational institutions:
(c) voluntary groups, work and informal relationships:
(d) the mass media;
(e) government and party agencies.

It should be noted that there are always overlaps between these agents and they cannot be
examined in complete isolation Also, the efficacy of each agent depends on many other variables
such as level of education. geographical nation, mobility, and social status of the people in a
given society.
i. Family
Family represents the first window through which the child views the world. The role of the
family in political socialization may however vary with the social and economic status of the
families Children from walking class families who receive little exposure to politics or political
information from their families may see the school as a primary source of political information.
Also, children from disorganised family nations where there is no lather figure will develop
different attitudes to that of children (torn homes with more normal family patterns. Children
whose parents are powerful, with more interest in politics are likely to be more politically
57
conscious than those whose parents are apolitical. Children acquire basic orientations of life from
their parents. An example. of these orientation is a sense of belonging to a political community.

ii. The School

Political education. to many children, begins at the school This observation is true of children
from low socio economic backgrounds and children with low intelligence. This group of children
perceive that their teachers have greater influence on their political socialization than their
families. The school accomplishes the task of political socialization through its curriculum.
classroom rituals values and attitudes unconsciously transmitted to the students by the staff The
social climate of the school, existence of political and non-political organisations and other extra-
curricula activities exert subtle socializing influences on the students. Also. the effect of being
educated on political affairs which is part of the task of the school bears on political
socialization. Subjects like civics, government, social studies citizenship education, general
studies. etc are directly used to teach political education to the students in our schools. Other
socializing stimuli such as the salute to the flag, singing of the national anthem celebration of
important national historical events and displays of historical portraits or events on classroom
walk are very important strategies in the teaching of political education. In addition, the teachers
through the expression of their opinions, display of interests In political events may
unconsciously influence the political orientations of students. Research study indicates that the
more democratic the classroom environment, the higher the sense of personal political
competence (Moore, 19891. The school environment and extra-curricular activities also serve to
instill political values. such as participation, competitiveness, achievement, observation and
respect for the rules of political games.

iii. Voluntary Group. Work and Informal Relationships

Membership of organisations like religious, tribal associations, professional association, club and
factories promote political education. People working together in factories or firms acquire much
political information from their organisations. Many of them hold periodic elections to elect their
officers, observe some rituals, share common ideals which are basic to political education. Some
religious organisations, like the Christian. or Muslim organisation through their pastors. Imams
or leaders often express political views on national issues which members usually old to be the

58
true position of things

iv. The Mass Media

The role of mass media like radio, television, newspapers, magazines and books are core
socialization agents more than any other socializing agents. There is no doubt very important.
Most children get most of their political information from the television. Many of them are able
to identify the President, Political parties and party's manifestoes from paid advertisements or
news items on the televisions, radio or newspapers Research findings on adults and children
suggest that the mass media have a significant effect on political orientations Both news and
entertainment have been found to have rich impact on political education. Children may absorb
role expectations about political and government figures from television by watching shows
about the policemen or spy organisations. During election campaigns people are exposed to
commercial urging for participation in politics or support for a candidate or political party.

v. Government and Party Agents

Political-parties are more diffused and always interested in getting to everybody in the society so
as to win wider support. Through their campaign strategies, rallies, political debates, posters,
paid advertisements in the media, political parties often yet the people to be politically alert and
mobilized to their political roles.

Government on its part may directly get involved in political education 01 the masses or in what
is called in Nigeria "social mobilization” This could take the forms of mass propaganda, seminar
sessions, workshops and lectures all designed to sensitize the people and get them politically
alive. Other objectives, of this direct involvement may be to direct the minds of the citizen
towards the goal and aspiration of the government, and to get their complete supports, loyality
and commitments to the country and the regime in power.
In Nigeria both government agents and individual private organisations are involved in political
socialization.

Factors Responsible for Non-Voting

In all communist countries, voter's turn out is usually high, while in the other countries. this is
usually low. In Germany for instance the figures of those who vote have shown a lot of
fluctuation during different elections. For example, in 1945, voting turn-out was 73.5%, 84.0%
59
in 1950, 76.7% in 1955. 78.7% in 1959, and in 1964. -it was 77%
Reasons for non-voting in most countries are therefore considered to be as a result of any or
combination of the following factors:
Faulty Electoral Register: This may be out of date, in the sense that, the registers are compiled
many months before the election. At the time of election when the registers are to be used, many
of the information that are to be used have turned absolute. Meanwhile some electors may have
died, some may have migrated. Where therefore, one hundred people were registered at the time
of registration when deduction is made, one would have been left with less than one hundred
percent at the time of election proper. This figure may about 5 - 10% and they may have been
unavoidably absent with justifiable reasons.

(a) POSITIVE OR ACTIVE ABSTAINNERS

A percentage of the electorate may not vote because they are positive or active abstainers. The
positive abstainers are those who abstain from voting because the political par, candidate or
issues, etc, did not appeal to them. They deliberate, decided not to waste their lime. They are
indifferent to whichever candidate eventually wins the election.
Positive abstainers ale also those who regard their constituencies as safe areas for their parties
and think that it does not matter if they do not vote and that their parties will definitely win.
(b) NEGATIVE ABSTAINNERS:
This could be occasional or persistent. This group of people are those who are apolitical and they
are not usual, interested in political matters. Their voting is dependent on their mood This group
of people are often the ill-informed electors that do not have opinion on current political issues
These people mild be regarded as perpetual or occasional abstainers. People in this category have
been und to be among women, young, old and among powerful people.

FACTORS INFLUENCING VOTING BEHAVIOUR

There is no single explanation for the factors that influence voting behaviour. But scholars and
researchers have tried over the years to attempt some clues to the factors affecting voting
behaviour in many countries.

Some of the factors identified are:

1. DEMOGRAPHIC FACTOR

60
 Here, the patterns of voting and voting participation are found to be the same in ma,
countries, at least in Great Britain, United States of America (U.S A) and in Germany.
In these, countries men have been found to vote more than women. Also, the better
educated people are known to be more voters than the less educated people In addition,
people between the ages of 35 years and years are known to be usually involved in voting
than the older voters. It is also reported that women are more in the right wing of political
spectrum than the man. (Wilkins, 1979).
Consequently therefore, sex and age are considered to be very important demographic
variables when considering factors that affect voting behaviour. Unfortunately, these
factors failed to tell us why different political parities fail or win an election.

2. RELIGIOUS FACTOR
Religion, as a factor has a relative utility when considering political behaviour across
countries. While religion is considered very important in one country, it may be less
important in another country. Because of this observation, the precise influence of religion
in a country’s political participation may be rather difficult. Religion is quite important in
religious states than in secular states when talking of political participation.
In Nigeria, the relationship of religion and politics is difficult to determine. This is so
because; it is difficult to identify supporters of a party with an identified religious sect.
In the northern part of Nigeria, it is the belief of some people that religion has an
important influence in the kind of support for a political party that is the support for
Northern People Congress (NPC) in the first Republic and National Party of Nigeria
(NPN) during second republic
3. TRADITION AND ENVIRONMENT
These are important in voting behaviour. That is voting and non-voting during election are
largely influenced by the tradition and environment where people live. Some people are
known to vote according to family traditions.
This therefore means that tradition often dictates the pattern of voting behaviour. An
example of this pattern is found among the different ethnic groups in Nigeria where
voting over the years have remained unchanged for a particular political party e.g. the Eli.
People of Ondo Slate who have remained steadfast in casting then for Awolowo party.

61
 Still under this factor, class relationships also tend towards traditional voting behaviour as
people of the same social economic status tend to vote in the 5ame direction. Meanwhile,
environment can influence voting behaviour in three ways.
4. REGIONAL ENVIRONMENT
People, who are/caving in certain parts of the count, are more likely to vote in the same
way as against those leaving in other parts. In Nigeria for instance where we have the
Yorubas in the Western. Igbos in the Eastern and Hausa-Fulani is in the northern parts of
the country respective,. then voting patterns incidentally have been re-fleeting the
geographical divisions of the country. That is. Yorubas are noted voting massively lid
Action Group (A.G) and tater, up, pa, 0, Nigeria (U.P.N), in the first and second
Republics respectively.

This is equally true of the lgbos whose voting behaviours have consistently showed sympathy tor
N.C.N.C and N.P.P within the same period.
In the same vein the Hausa/Fulani's voting behaviours did not depart, from total support the NPC
and NPN within the same period.

Home Surroundings: People tend to conform to the predominant influence within the areas they
live. Again one can argue that ethnic back-grounds and voting behaviours have positive
relationship in Nigeria. This is so because ethnic or backgrounds of people have greatly
influenced voting patterns in the country.

Work Environment: The point being made here is that people working in the same place are
more likely to vote the same way as against those who are scattered all about in the country or
state. It is however nece.ary to note that this factor may be difficult to determine because of the
effects of other factors or individual voters.

5. CLASS ALIGNMENT
This is another factor that determines voting behaviour. Some people cla.ify themselves
as lower, upper or middle classes and these classifications always reflect the way they
vote in elections.
Also, political parties are sometimes classified as the parties of the lower class, of the
upper class or for the middle class. Therefore, self-assigned class is an important factor in
62
 voting preferences.

6. TRADE UNION MEMBERSHIP

Trade Union membership has been identified as a major factor which influences political
behaviours of most British workers. In Britain, those who are registered members of trade
unions are .id to be more likely to vote for labour party than conservative party, In
Nigeria, trade union membership has helped to explain the reason why political parties
like the banned Unity Party of Nigeria (UPN), Nigeria People's Party (NPP) and People
Redemption Party (PRP) have been popular in labour Circle. These parties had in their
manifestoes, soft pedals for the labour unions in the country.

7. ECOLOGY
This is the impact of environment such as the impact of rural or urban cities on voting
pattern. It is therefore, true that urban dwellers are more likely to vote during elections
than rural dwellers. Factors that may be held responsible for this observation are among
others, poor communication, bad roads, natural barriers like large pool of water separating
the people from their counterparts in other parts of the count, etc. The last factor here
perhaps, must be the reason why people in the riverine areas of Nigeria have not been
noted for high turnout during elections. The use of helicopter in the delivery, of electoral
materials to this area was adopted during the 1979 elections with little or significant
success.

8. PARTY IDENTIFICATION
The degree of general attachment which people have to certain political parties often
determines the way they vote in elections. The general attitudes of voter during election
usually show a feeling of party "A" is our party and as such, we must vote it"
9. ISSUES
Political issues and party manifestoes are vital factors tor consideration during elections.
Some of these issues are education, health, foreign relations, policies social welfare
package. etc. Some individuals may give attachment to one side or the other of a public
question or issues. During the 1979 elections, Unity Party of Nigeria for instance, got its
votes from many voters because of its free education policy. National issues therefore

63
 form the matters basis for decisions on the part of the electorate during elections.

10. CANDIDATE'S ORIENTATION

By this factor, we are referring to the voter's attitudes towards candidate personal
qualities and his or her party's affiliation notwithstanding. People may not the some traits
in a particular candidate's personality and therefore decide not to vote for him. The most
appropriate example here was the election of Governor Otedola of Lagos State against
the rejection of his political opponent during the 1993 elections in Nigeria.
It is necessary to state at this juncture that no single factor will be adequate to explain
why people vote during elections why they refused to dolly) vote or why vote in a
particular way. Instead a multi-dimensional or multi-causal approach in answering these
questions would be a better option.

64