Religious Cross-Pressures and Electoral Decision Making

Abstract

For many Americans, religious teachings are central to political identity, yet these teachings often do not align neatly with party platforms. How do voters decide when their faith crosses partisan lines? I examine this question by focusing on Catholic and Muslim Americans, whose moral and social world-views span both sides of the partisan divide. Using a novel ‘dynamic’ choice experiment, I show that religious cross-pressures shape how voters arrive at their choices. Contrary to classic accounts linking cross-pressures to disengagement, I find no evidence of increased decision avoidance; instead, voters remain engaged but simplify their choices. Cross-pressure salience is linked to greater decision difficulty, reduced information search, and greater reliance on issue prioritisation. These findings challenge the view that attitudinal conflict improves the quality of democratic participation, suggesting instead that cross-pressures constrain deliberation and may weaken the representational signal voters send to parties.