I'm normally one of those people who 'hate' on those who don't vote. I think there's a difference between having a reason (especially one as well thought out as this one) and just being like "screw the man."

I applaud your articulation--and more importantly--your reasoning!

Well, yes, but I also think it's possible that a social scientist can appeal to such logic as a post-hoc rationalisation for their apathy, perhaps as an epiphenomenon. You've also got to acknowledge that your decision not to vote may be mediated by cognitive and emotional states you're not consciously aware of, and your professional profile provides you with an explanation of convenience for your inaction.

IMO this article does give a good reason to not vote, at least for a social psychologist examining elections.
What I like best about it is that it isn't arguing that there's something wrong with voting in general. It really bothers me when people justify not voting by saying that one vote doesn't matter, or that only pollyanna sheeple vote, or that voting only legitimizes our plutocratic overloads.

Dr. Baumeister,

I highly respect your scholarly work, but I must respectfully disagree with the views you have expressed about voting.

Voting is an obligation of citizenship, not just a privilege. One must always ask, What if everyone did as I do? Where would our nation be if everyone "wimped out" with their own personal excuse for not participating in the democratic process?

There is something seriously wrong if you can't form an opinion about a political candidate and still maintain an appropriate professional distance necessary for success in your work.

Does this same reasoning animate your teaching? Do you say, I don't form an opinion about what my students should learn, because that would introduce bias into my work--? Of course not.

Likewise, your failure to vote can't be properly blamed on the same flawed reasoning.

Roy: The reasoning you give is fair enough, but doesn't apply to most people. In other words, it doesn't tell us very much about whether voting is worthwhile or whether we should vote, or why other people vote (or don't). Not that those things were your intention here -- autobiography is still interesting :)

But I'd be interested whether you think people *in general* should vote?

Speckles: one vote [almost always] doesn't matter. That's not just a silly platitude, but a statistical fact that has spawned a lot of very interesting research on voting behavior.

Timothy: Asking "what would happen if everyone did what I did" is a starting point, but doesn't get us very far. The less people that vote, the higher the chance that my vote matters -- and every rational person should recognize this so it generalizes -- but it must get very low in participation to be worth it. So why do people still vote? Probably for non-rational reasons (it makes them feel better, makes them feel part of the group, etc.), though maybe also out of a false sense of efficacy (i.e. not realizing the vanishing chance of their own vote ever mattering).

For myself, I don't vote, for a few reasons:

(1) We've got a crappy voting system, and some alternatives (despite their own drawbacks) seem a lot better if we really have to vote:
http://www.teach12.com/ttcx/VotingFreeLecture.aspx?ai=32018&WT.mc_id=FLS...

(2) In anything beyond a local vote, your vote basically won't ever change the outcome. Heavy campaigning *might*, but only if you're in a tight-race area and you are a good campaigner and you find the small chance of success worth the large personal investment.

(3) Other peoples' votes seem to be based/swayed on some pretty shallow things (some studies suggest that looks can significantly help predict who'll win an election). Campaigners pander for popularity and what we vote on has little to do with how laws are enacted. Most people have no idea how laws are enacted, and how their representatives are involved in that process.

(4) In essence, for me voting would be granting a legitimacy to a system I don't support. Consenting to vote seems to say "I agree to go along with this system, to follow the laws that are enacted, *even if I don't support them*". It says that I will register my opinion (as if it matters) and then be cool if the very opposite is instituted. In a sense, one seems more bound to the law if one consents to vote.

(5) Perhaps most importantly: voting grants a false sense of efficacy, of having done something. Which makes people complacent, and keeps them from getting agitated enough to push for real change. People who vote (or campaign) feel like they've done their part, and if they lose, they blame it on the other voters, rather than the underlying system. This transference of blame discourages reform at the level of the system itself.