A normative set of criteria to increase political competence through voting advice applications

Javier Padilla, Javier Ramos, Guillermo Romero Moreno, Jesús Enrique Chueca

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract / Description of output

This paper argues that current voting advice applications (VAAs) do not sufficiently fulfil their stated aim of increasing voters' political competence. First, we define four criteria to evaluate whether their methods are likely to increase political competence: informativeness, respect for users' way of comparing and aggregating policy issues, reliability, and transparency. Second, we argue that current VAAs compare and aggregate users' and parties' policy preferences following a weak method that fails in two of them. To prove it, we analyse the methodology of most currents VAAs and use the outcomes from the EU-Vox 2014 in several countries. Third, we discuss two possibilities by which VAAs could improve: (1) by using ex-ante survey data to fill their gaps, or (2) by creating a learning algorithm to adapt the VAA to users' preferences. We found that some changes need to be made if VAAs aim to have an impact on users' political competence.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)149-175
Number of pages27
JournalInternational Journal of Electronic Governance
Issue number2
Publication statusPublished - 29 Jul 2021

Keywords / Materials (for Non-textual outputs)

  • wisdom of crowds
  • technology platforms
  • public sector
  • systematic review
  • meta-synthesis
  • voting advice applications
  • voting behaviour


Dive into the research topics of 'A normative set of criteria to increase political competence through voting advice applications'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this