The Influence of Voter Personality Traits on Electoral Decision-Making Toward the Future Forward Party in Thailand
Main Article Content
Abstract
This research aims to 1) study the personality of voters, 2) study the personality of the Future Forward Party, and 3) examine the personality factors of voters that influence their decision to vote for the Future Forward Party. The study employed quantitative research, specifically survey research. The data collection tool was a questionnaire, and the sample comprised eligible voters across five regions of the country: the North, East, West, Central, and South. Data was collected using quota sampling from two provinces in each region where the Future Forward Party received the most votes, totaling 1,608 participants. Statistical methods used include percentages, means, standard deviations (S.D.), and regression analysis.
The research findings revealed that: 1) The average personality score of the sample group indicated that the "innovative thinking" trait was the highest, with a mean score at a relatively high level (x̄ = 4.78, S.D. = 1.14); 2) The average personality score of the Future Forward Party indicated that the "liberal" trait ranked first, with a mean score at a high level (x̄ = 5.98, S.D. = 1.13); and 3) The personality factors of voters, which include benefit-seeking (X1), sociability (X2), innovative thinking (X3), liberalism (X4), openness (X5), anxiety (X6), mental resilience (X7), independence (X8), and self-control (X9), accounted for 74.70% of the decision to vote for the Future Forward Party.
Downloads
Article Details

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
References
ศาลรัฐธรรมนูญ. (2563). “ยุบพรรคอนาคตใหม่”. https://www.thaipbs.or.th/
news/content/289173
สุพัฒน์ สุกมลสันต์. (2553). ขนาดผล: ความมีนัยสำคัญทางปฏิบัติในการวิจัย. วารสาร
ภาษาปริทัศน์, 25, 26-38. https://www.culi.chula.ac.th/Images/asset/
pasaa_paritat_journal/file-25-148-dvkis2254169.pdf?utm_
source=chatgpt.com
Ackermann, K. (2017). Individual Differences and Political Contexts – The
Role of Personality Traits and Direct Democracy in Explaining
Political Protest. Swiss Political Science Review, 23(1), 21-49.
doi:10.1111/spsr.12227.
Allport, G. W. (1961). Pattern and Growth in Personality. United State
of America : Rinehart and Winston.
Barbaranelli, C., Caprara, G.V., Vecchione, M., Fraley, C.R. (2007). Voters’
personality traits in presidential elections. Personality and
Individual Differences, 42(7), 1199-1208. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
paid.2006.09.029
Burke, E. (2004). His political philosophy. Metaphysics Research Lab,
Stanford University.
Cattell, R. B. (2016). Description and measurement of personality.
World Book Company.
Constitutional Court of Thailand. (2020). Constitutional Court ruling
No. 17/2563 (2020). https://www.constitutionalcourt.or.th/
occ_en/download/article/article_20210916111807.pdf
Election Commission of Thailand. (2019). Official results of the 2019
general election. https://www.ect.go.th
Etikan, I., Musa, S. A., & Alkassim, R. S. (2016). Comparison of convenience
sampling and purposive sampling. American Journal of
Theoretical and Applied Statistics, 5(1), 1–4. https://doi.
org/10.11648/j.ajtas.20160501.11
Eysenck, H. J. (1947). Dimensions of personality. Kegan Paul.
Fromm, E.H. (1941). Escape from Freedom. New York: Holt, Reinhart
and Winston.
Hiel, A.L., Kossowska, M. (2000). The relationship between Openness to
Experience and political ideology. Personality and Individual
Differences. 28(4), 741-751. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0191-
(99)00135-X
Locke, J. (1963). Two treatises of government. Cambridge England.
McConnell, J. V. (1977). Understanding human behavior: An introduction
of psychology. (2nd ed.). New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Smith, G. (2009). Conceptualizing and Testing Brand Personality in
British Politics. Journal of Political Marketing, 8, 209-232. https://
doi.org/10.1080/15377850903044858
Yamane, T. (1963). Statistics: an introductory analysis. New York:
Harper & Row.