Welcome

There is no democracy without free and fair elections. Elections provide a crucial opportunity to assess the actual workings of a democracy. Canadian elections are the primary focus of the Canadian Election Study (CES). The main objective is to explain what makes people decide to vote (or not to vote), and, if they do, what makes them decide to support a given party or candidate, and why parties gain or lose ground from one election to another.

The 2008 Canadian Election Study consists of a survey with nearly 4500 eligible voters conducted during the second half of the election campaign. 3689 of these respondents completed a post-election survey as well. 1238 respondents who had participated in the 2004-2006 panel study were also interviewed after the election. All of the interviews were conducted by telephone. The final component of the study was a self-administered mail-back survey completed by 1939 respondents. The fieldwork was conducted by the Institute for Social Research (ISR) at York University and the study was financed by Elections Canada. The principal co-investigators were Elisabeth Gidengil (McGill University), Joanna Everitt, (University of New Brunswick—Saint John), Patrick Fournier (University of Montreal) and Neil Nevitte (University of Toronto).

Together with André Blais (University of Montreal), these same researchers were also responsible for the design and conduct of the 2004 and 2006 Canadian Election Studies. Funding for the 2006 study was provided by Elections Canada. The 2006 study consists of a rolling cross-section survey conducted during the campaign with over 4,000 eligible voters. Half of the interviews were conducted with respondents who had participated in the 2004 CES. 3,250 of the campaign survey respondents also completed a post-election interview. The field work was conducted by York University’s Institute for Social Research (ISR).

The 2004 Canadian Election Study was financed by Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada. Elections Canada and the Institute for Research on Public Policy (IRPP) were partners in this project. The study consists of a three-wave survey conducted by the Institute for Social Research (ISR) at York University. It includes a rolling cross-section survey with over 4,300 interviews, a post-election survey with more than 3,100 of the campaign survey respondents, and a self-administered mail-back questionnaire filled out by more than 1,500 of the post-election respondents.

The primary mandate of the study is to provide a thorough account of the election, to underline the main reasons why people vote the way they do, to indicate what does and does not change during the campaign and from one election to another, and to highlight similarities and differences between voting and elections in Canada and in other democratic countries. The second mandate is to contribute to the development of scientific knowledge regarding the motivations of voters and the meanings of elections and election campaigns in democratic societies. The third mandate is to assemble a rich set of data about Canadians' attitudes and opinions on a wide variety of social, economic, and political issues, and to make that data publicly available to researchers in political science, sociology, economics, communications, and journalism.
Blais, Gidengil, and Nevitte, along with Richard Nadeau from the University of Montreal were also responsible for the design and conduct of the 2000 and 1997 Canadian Election Studies. The 2000 Canadian election study, funded by SSHRC, Elections Canada and the IRPP, was conducted by the ISR and Jolicoeur & Associés. It includes a rolling cross-section survey with 3,651 interviews, a post-election survey with 2,862 of the campaign survey respondents, and a self-administered mail-back questionnaire filled out by 1,535 of the post-election respondents.

The 1997 survey is based primarily on a large survey of a representative sample of Canadian voters, conducted by the Institute for Social Research (ISR) at York University. The 1997 survey has three components. First, a total of 3,949 telephone interviews were completed during the election campaign, approximately 110 per day. Second, a total of 3,170 of the campaign survey respondents were reinterviewed in the eight weeks following the election. Third, a total of 1,857 of the post-election respondents completed a mail-back questionnaire. The 1997 study was funded by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada and by Elections Canada.