COMPARISON OF THE STRENGTH OF POLITICAL COMMUNICATION OF THREE PAIRS IN THE 2024 INDONESIAN PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION: A QUALITATIVE REVIEW OF THE BANDWAGON EFFECT, EXPECTED UTILITY, AND SIMPLE CANDIDATE PREFERENCE MODELS
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.53625/ijss.v5i5.12388Keywords:
Bandwagon Effect, Expected Utility, Simple Candidate Preference 2024 Presidential ElectionAbstract
The 2024 Indonesian Presidential Election demonstrated the imbalance in political communication power between the three candidate pairs: Prabowo–Gibran (PRAGIB), Anies–Muhaimin (AMIN), and Ganjar–Mahfud (GAMA). This imbalance is evident in each pair's ability to leverage voter behavior through three models: the bandwagon effect, expected utility, and simple candidate preference as proposed by Abramowitz (1989). This study aims to compare the political communication power of the three candidate pairs in implementing these three models of voter behavior in the 2024 Presidential Election. The study used a descriptive qualitative approach with a focus on the political communication strategies of the three candidate pairs. Data were collected through in-depth interviews with two key informants involved in national political surveys and campaign political communications. Analysis was conducted using comparative analysis techniques to identify patterns of intensity and effectiveness of each pair's communication strategies. The results show that PRAGIB is the most dominant pair in the three models of voter behavior. They succeeded in maximizing the bandwagon effect through mass mobilization, media support, and digital campaigns. In the expected utility model, PRAGIB stands out through concrete program promises that are easily understood by the public. In simple candidate preference, Prabowo's personal image and Gibran's association with President Jokowi generated a simple but highly effective preference. AMIN held a middle ground, with strength in the urban-educated segment but limited grassroots reach. GAMA held the weakest position in all three models due to its inconsistent narrative, image, and mobilization strategy. This research confirms that the dominance of political communication was a key factor in PRAGIB's electoral success in the 2024 presidential election.
References
Aldrich, J. H. (1980). Before the convention: Strategies and choices in presidential nomination campaigns. University of Chicago Press.
Creswell, J.W., & Creswell, J.D. (2018). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approach. Fifth edition. Los Angeles: SAGE Publishing.
CSIS. (2023). Laporan survei nasional politik dan perilaku pemilih. Centre for Strategic and International Studies.
Goidel, R. K., & Shields, T. G. (1994). The vanishing marginals, the bandwagon, and the mass media. Journal of Politics, 56(3), 802–810
Indikator Politik Indonesia. (2023). Persepsi publik terhadap ekonomi dan politik nasional menjelang Pemilu 2024. Indikator Politik Indonesia
Kim, J. (2012). The bandwagon effect of political social media: Hype, polarization, and influence in Korean elections. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 24(2), 190–210.
Lembaga Ilmu Pengetahuan Indonesia. (2020). Laporan kajian efektivitas bantuan sosial dan perilaku pemilih. LIPI Press
Lenz, G. S. (2012). Follow the leader? How voters respond to politicians’ policies and performance. University of Chicago Press.
Lijphart, A. (1971). Comparative politics and the comparative method. American Political Science Review, 65(3), 682–693
McAllister, I. (2007). The personalization of politics. In R. J. Dalton & H.-D. Klingemann (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of political behavior (pp. 571–588). Oxford University Press
McNair, B. (2011). An introduction to political communication (5th ed.). Routledge.
McQuail, D. (2010). McQuail’s mass communication theory (6th ed.). Sage.
Mehrabian, A. (1998). Effects of poll reports on voter preferences. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 28(23), 2119–2130.
Mills, A. J. (2014). Comparative research: Comparative case studies. Sage Publications.
Muhtadi, B. (2019). Populism, Islam, and electoral politics in Indonesia. ISEAS-Yusof Ishak Institute.
Nimmo, D. (2000). Political communication and public opinion in America. Greenwood Press.
Persson, T., & Tabellini, G. (2000). Political economics: Explaining economic policy. MIT Press
Popkin, S. (1991). The reasoning voter: Communication and persuasion in presidential campaigns. University of Chicago Press.
Ragin, C. C. (1987). The comparative method: Moving beyond qualitative and quantitative strategies. University of California Press.
Saiful Mujani Research & Consulting. (2024). Trend opini publik dan citra kandidat menjelang Pemilu 2024. SMRC.
Saiful Mujani, S. (2022). Voting behavior and democratic consolidation in Indonesia. Journal of Current Southeast Asian Affairs, 41(3), 356–379.
Sartori, G. (1976). Parties and party systems: A framework for analysis. Cambridge University Press.
Simpser, A. (2013). Why governments and parties manipulate elections: Theory, practice, and implications. Cambridge University Press
Weber, M. (1947). The theory of social and economic organization (A. M. Henderson & T. Parsons, Trans.). Oxford University Press.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Iskandar Muda Hasibuan, Morissan Morissan, Marlinda Irwanti Poernomo
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
