The table below shows voter turnout rates by household income and age group in a U.S. congressional election.
| Household Income | Age 18–29 | Age 30–44 | Age 45–59 | Age 60 and Older |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Under | ||||
| – | ||||
| and Over |
Based on the data in the table, which of the following conclusions about political participation in the United States is best supported?
- AHigh-income young voters participate at higher rates than low-income elderly voters because economic resources completely offset lifecycle differences in voter turnout.
- BThe low turnout rate among young, low-income voters proves that their low sense of political efficacy makes them engage exclusively in retrospective voting.
- Differences in turnout across age brackets and income levels demonstrate that both lifecycle position and socioeconomic status are positively correlated with voting rates.Answer
- DPolitical parties target their campaign messages solely to low-income seniors to capitalize on their high voter turnout rates.
Answer
Differences in turnout across age brackets and income levels demonstrate that both lifecycle position and socioeconomic status are positively correlated with voting rates.
The correct answer is correct because the data in the table shows two clear trends. Reading vertically, turnout rates increase as age increases for every income bracket (for example, in the lowest income bracket, turnout rises from to to to ). This illustrates that older age (a lifecycle effect) is positively correlated with turnout. Reading horizontally, turnout rates increase as household income rises for every age group (for example, among those aged 18–29, turnout rises from to to ). This illustrates that higher socioeconomic status is positively correlated with voter turnout. Together, these trends support the conclusion that both lifecycle position and socioeconomic status correlate positively with voter turnout.
Step-by-Step Solution
Key Concept
Voter Turnout and Demographic Influence
Estimated Time:1m 30s