What is the second-order election model in simple terms?

In less important elections where government is not at stake, fewer people vote, and those who do tend to punish the governing party or back small parties.

Does it apply to local elections elsewhere?

It was built around European Parliament elections, but researchers in many countries test whether local and midterm-style elections show similar patterns.

Second-Order Election Model

🏛️ Politics & Public Administration By CampusDown Wiki Editorial Team Last updated October 27, 2026

The second-order election model holds that, unlike first-order national elections that decide who governs, in elections seen as having less at stake, such as European Parliament or local elections, voters decide on the basis of national politics, turnout is low, governing parties lose, and small and new parties do better. Karlheinz Reif and Hermann Schmitt proposed it in 1980.

Contents

1. Core predictions
2. The electoral cycle and tests
3. Interpreting vote motives
4. FAQ
5. References

Core predictions

Analyzing the first direct European Parliament elections in 1979, Reif and Schmitt (1980) argued that voters judged by domestic politics rather than European issues, making the contest nine second-order national elections. They predicted lower turnout, losses for governing parties, gains for small and new parties and more invalid ballots. These follow from the low perceived benefits of voting in such elections.

The electoral cycle and tests

Marsh (1998) analyzed four European Parliament elections and confirmed that governing-party losses peak at mid-term in the national electoral cycle, a pattern resembling the surge and decline Campbell (1960) observed in US midterms. Van der Eijk and Franklin (1996) showed from voter surveys that people tend to vote sincerely rather than strategically in second-order elections, and Schmitt (2005) found the model largely held in 2004 after eastern enlargement.

Interpreting vote motives

Hix and Marsh (2007) distinguished whether governing-party losses reflect punishment of government performance or protest unrelated to government, concluding that both operate but punishment dominates. Hobolt and Wittrock (2011) showed experimentally that when given information about European issues, voters give more weight to European-level considerations.

FAQ

What is the second-order election model in simple terms?: In less important elections where government is not at stake, fewer people vote, and those who do tend to punish the governing party or back small parties.
Does it apply to local elections elsewhere?: It was built around European Parliament elections, but researchers in many countries test whether local and midterm-style elections show similar patterns.

Sources reviewed: 2026-10-26

References

Reif, K., & Schmitt, H. (1980). Nine second-order national elections: A conceptual framework for the analysis of European election results. European Journal of Political Research, 8(1), 3–44. The founding article.
van der Eijk, C., & Franklin, M. N. (Eds.). (1996). Choosing Europe? The European electorate and national politics in the face of union. University of Michigan Press. European electorate study.
Marsh, M. (1998). Testing the second-order election model after four European elections. British Journal of Political Science, 28(4), 591–607. Testing the model.
Schmitt, H. (2005). The European Parliament elections of June 2004: Still second-order? West European Politics, 28(3), 650–679. Post-enlargement test.
Hix, S., & Marsh, M. (2007). Punishment or protest? Understanding European Parliament elections. The Journal of Politics, 69(2), 495–510. Punishment or protest.
Hobolt, S. B., & Wittrock, J. (2011). The second-order election model revisited: An experimental test of vote choices in European Parliament elections. Electoral Studies, 30(1), 29–40. Experimental test.
Campbell, A. (1960). Surge and decline: A study of electoral change. Public Opinion Quarterly, 24(3), 397–418. Low-stimulus elections.

Reports and materials that use this theory (Korean)

There are no materials dedicated to this theory yet, but you can search related reports in the CampusDown library (Korean).

Find more reports · Search '이차 선거 모델' on CampusDown →

Coattail EffectWhat the coattail effect is: support for a popular top-of-ticket candidate carries over to the same party's legislative and local candidates. Covers measurement, historical change and comparative research.🏛️ Politics & Public Administration Retrospective VotingWhat retrospective voting is: voters reward or punish incumbents based on past performance. Covers Key and Fiorina, electoral control models, irrelevant events, recency bias, blind retrospection and the debate over voter competence.🏛️ Politics & Public Administration Paradox of VotingWhat the paradox of voting is: one vote almost never decides an election yet many people vote, plus Downs's expected-utility calculus, the D term, minimax regret, game-theoretic models, altruistic voting and field experiments on turnout.🏛️ Politics & Public Administration Economic VotingWhat economic voting is: voters reward governments for good economies and punish them for bad ones. Covers Kramer's classic study, sociotropic versus pocketbook voting, retrospective and prospective evaluations, clarity of responsibility and limits.🏛️ Politics & Public Administration

Latest ArticlesView all ›

New guides for college study and assignments (Korean)

This article was last updated on October 27, 2026. It is based on widely recognized original works and textbooks; when citing it in a paper, please check the original sources listed in the references.