Figure 3 shows the voter turnout in the dataset years as the lines are representation of the countries
Figure 4 shows an easier explanation of average of voter turnout for the countries in the dataset. This shows the overall to give the average turnout because figure 4 gives an understanding of this. The countries that have higher turnout are more of List PR and the lower ones are FPTP. An interesting outcome of this looking at the Scandinavian countries all have mostly higher turnout comparing against the other countries. Mexico does have compulsory voting but have the lowest turnout among the other countries even with countries do not have compulsory voting. Along the line shows Austria and New Zealand does have a one of the highest turnout …show more content…
These variables could be a contributing factor on helping the outcome of voter turnout for countries in the different electoral system. The dependent variable was recoded from 0 to 6 variable representation of the electoral system in the dataset. By looking at the sig. level of the first five independent levels is less than 5% of the 95% confidence interval therefore we fail to reject the null hypothesis. Looking at the last three variables which are greater than 5% (.05) of the 95% confidence interval therefore we must accept the null hypothesis. There is a negative effect of voter turnout by -2.6% on the electoral system while voting age population have a very small negative effect on the systems. The interesting about this is there is a positive effect of the population and registration with the system while the voting age has negative effect. When thinking of this should have a positive effect of the outcome because it should produce a better outcome with turnout. There is a strong negative effect on the countries that are communist in the electoral system therefore this means communist countries should have an effect on the outcome for turnout. There is barely any effect of the region and GDP on electoral system, which is kind of thought to be true. The thought was trying to be presented was region could …show more content…
By looking at the voter turnout produce different results than Table 4. The most important variable out of these will be the electoral system and one that contains a population samples. Registration and voting age are greater than 5% (.05) of the 95% confidence interval therefore we must accept the null hypothesis. While population is barely less than 5% of the 95% confidence interval therefore we fail to reject the null hypothesis. This brings out a motivating ideal of the different population concepts being different from voting age and registration as this contains part of the population in this. Also communist variable is greater than 5% therefore we also accept the null hypothesis. While the Region, GDP, and Electoral System are less than 5% therefore the outcome is we reject the null hypothesis. This is the same thought at the beginning and nothing really much of a surprise. Registration and population has a negative effect on voter turnout. This kind of does up hold the thought of if the election is less important voter turnout will decline. While the voting age does have a positive effect but very little. The communist variable have a big negative effect, this means communist countries have a lower turnout while noncommunist countries have a stronger turnout. When looking at Table 4 of electoral system
Figure 4 shows an easier explanation of average of voter turnout for the countries in the dataset. This shows the overall to give the average turnout because figure 4 gives an understanding of this. The countries that have higher turnout are more of List PR and the lower ones are FPTP. An interesting outcome of this looking at the Scandinavian countries all have mostly higher turnout comparing against the other countries. Mexico does have compulsory voting but have the lowest turnout among the other countries even with countries do not have compulsory voting. Along the line shows Austria and New Zealand does have a one of the highest turnout …show more content…
These variables could be a contributing factor on helping the outcome of voter turnout for countries in the different electoral system. The dependent variable was recoded from 0 to 6 variable representation of the electoral system in the dataset. By looking at the sig. level of the first five independent levels is less than 5% of the 95% confidence interval therefore we fail to reject the null hypothesis. Looking at the last three variables which are greater than 5% (.05) of the 95% confidence interval therefore we must accept the null hypothesis. There is a negative effect of voter turnout by -2.6% on the electoral system while voting age population have a very small negative effect on the systems. The interesting about this is there is a positive effect of the population and registration with the system while the voting age has negative effect. When thinking of this should have a positive effect of the outcome because it should produce a better outcome with turnout. There is a strong negative effect on the countries that are communist in the electoral system therefore this means communist countries should have an effect on the outcome for turnout. There is barely any effect of the region and GDP on electoral system, which is kind of thought to be true. The thought was trying to be presented was region could …show more content…
By looking at the voter turnout produce different results than Table 4. The most important variable out of these will be the electoral system and one that contains a population samples. Registration and voting age are greater than 5% (.05) of the 95% confidence interval therefore we must accept the null hypothesis. While population is barely less than 5% of the 95% confidence interval therefore we fail to reject the null hypothesis. This brings out a motivating ideal of the different population concepts being different from voting age and registration as this contains part of the population in this. Also communist variable is greater than 5% therefore we also accept the null hypothesis. While the Region, GDP, and Electoral System are less than 5% therefore the outcome is we reject the null hypothesis. This is the same thought at the beginning and nothing really much of a surprise. Registration and population has a negative effect on voter turnout. This kind of does up hold the thought of if the election is less important voter turnout will decline. While the voting age does have a positive effect but very little. The communist variable have a big negative effect, this means communist countries have a lower turnout while noncommunist countries have a stronger turnout. When looking at Table 4 of electoral system