Abstract How do voters use left-right ideological labels as shortcuts for policy positions in evaluating electoral candidates? We offer a distinction between maximal and minimal forms of ideological thinking. While maximal thinking implies that voters rely on ideological proximity as a proxy for policy congruence with candidates, minimal thinking requires only that voters use ideological labels to infer candidates’ positions—even if their own ideological identification is inconsistent with policy preferences. Drawing on original experimental data from Canada (N = 1,087)—a multiparty system with a fluid ideological landscape—we find that voters’ ideological self-placement is often misaligned with their policy positions, especially among right-leaning individuals. However, voters still use ideological proximity to infer candidates’ policy stances in the absence of policy information, supporting the Minimal Theory. These findings contribute to theories of political decision-making beyond the United States and have implications for substantive representation in systems with centrist or ideologically flexible parties.
Lachance et al. (Sun,) studied this question.