Main Article Content

Abstract

This study aimed to explore the attributes of an ideal leader and to predict voting participation in the 2019 Indonesian presidential election based on the ideal leader attributes, gender, level of trust, and information processing. The exploration phase was conducted by using an indigenous psychological approach. The prediction phase was conducted by implementing machine learning with a decision tree model. Data was collected at one time by involving 211 respondents (53 male, 158 female; Mage = 20.09; SD = 1.81). Based on the exploration phase, an ideal leader showed seven psychological attributes: personality, integrity, folk-oriented, capability, assertiveness, productivity, and intellectuality. Based on the decision tree model, the trust level was the most dominant factor to predict decision to participate (vote/abstain), followed by the ideal leader attributes. The model showed four categories of participants who were certain to decide to vote in the presidential election, and could predict voting decision (vote/abstain) accurately.

Keywords

decision tree model ideal leader attributes information processing participative decision-making trust level atribut pemimpin ideal keputusan partisipasi model pohon keputusan pemrosesan informasi tingkat kepercayaan

Article Details

How to Cite
Nurjaman, T. A. (2021). The attributes of an ideal leader and people`s decisions in voting participation: Indigenous study and decision tree analysis. Jurnal Psikologi Ulayat: Indonesian Journal of Indigenous Psychology, 8(1), 43–58. https://doi.org/10.24854/jpu153

References

  1. Agung, I. M., Masyhuri, & Hidayat. (2013). Dinamika ketidakpercayaan terhadap politisi: Suatu pendekatan psikologi indigenous. Jurnal Psikologi, 9(1), 25–30.
  2. Ahler, D. J., Citrin, J., Dougal, M. C., & Lenz, G. S. (2017). Face value? Experimental evidence that candidate appearance influences electoral choice. Political Behavior, 39(1), 77–102. doi: 10.1007/s11109-016-9348-6
  3. Allen, T. J. (2017). Exit to the right? Comparing far right voters and abstainers in Western Europe. Electoral Studies, 50, 103–115. doi: 10.1016/j.electstud.2017.09.012
  4. Andersson, G., & Lindvall, N. (2018). Trust and turnout: An empirical study of South African voters (Research paper). Uppsala University, Sweden.
  5. Bakhtiyar. (2018). Dinamika literasi politik menjelang tahun 2019: Urgensitas memahami perilaku pemilih milenial. Jurnal Sosiologi Pendidikan Humanis, 1, 65–72.
  6. Blankenship, B. T., & Stewart, A. J. (2019). Threat, trust, and Trump: Identity and voting in the 2016 presidential election. Politics, Groups, and Identities, 7(3), 724–736. doi: 10.1080/21565503.2019.1633932
  7. Chaiken, S., & Ledgerwood, A. (2012). A theory of heuristic and systematic information processing. Dalam P. Van Lange, A. Kruglanski, & E. Higgins (Eds.), Theories of social psychology (hlm. 246–266). SAGE Publications.
  8. Chrisharyanto, H., Rahmania, T., & Kertamuda, F. E. (2014). Konsep pemimpin nasional yang baik: Survey pada masyarakat Jakarta. Jurnal Sosio-Humaniora, 5(1), 1689–1699. doi: 10.1017/CBO9781107415324.004
  9. Ditonto, T. M., Hamilton, A. J., & Redlawsk, D. P. (2013). Gender stereotypes, information search, and voting behavior in political campaigns. Political Behavior, 36(2), 335–358. doi: 10.1007/s11109-013-9232-6
  10. Faturochman, Minza, W. M., & Nurjaman, T. A. (2017). Memahami dan mengambangkan indigenous psychology. Pustaka Pelajar.
  11. Grönlund, K., & Setälä, M. (2007). Political trust, satisfaction and voter turnout. Comparative European Politics, 5(4), 400–422. doi: 10.1057/palgrave.cep.6110113
  12. Gunawan, G. (2019). Model kepemimpinan ideal bagi mahasiswa di Jawa Barat. Journal of Psychological Science and Profession, 3(1), 1-5. doi: 10.24198/jpsp.v3i1.22804
  13. Husein, H. (2014, Mei 19). Bravo ‘partai golput.’ Republika. https://www.watchindonesia.de/wp-content/uploads/Teraju19.5.14.pdf
  14. Katz, G., Alvarez, R. M., Calvo, E., Escolar, M., & Pomares, J. (2011). Assessing the impact of alternative voting technologies on multi-party elections: Design features, heuristic processing and voter choice. Political Behavior, 33(2), 247–270. doi: 10.1007/s11109-010-9132-y
  15. Lee, Y., & Schachter, H. L. (2019). Exploring the relationship between trust in government and citizen participation. International Journal of Public Administration, 42(5), 405–416. doi: 10.1080/01900692.2018.1465956
  16. Marsetio. (2018). Kepemimpinan nusantara. Universitas Pertahanan.
  17. Najib, A. (2013). Konstruksi pemimpin ideal untuk Indonesia. Jurnal Agama Dan Hak Azazi Manusia, 3(1), 141–161.
  18. Nichols, A. L., & Cottrell, C. A. (2014). What do people desire in their leaders? The role of leadership level on trait desirability. Leadership Quarterly, 25(4), 711–729. doi: 10.1016/j.leaqua.2014.04.001
  19. Northouse, P. G. (2016). Leadership: Theory and practice. SAGE Publications.
  20. Nwankwo, C. F., Okafor, U. P., & Asuoha, G. C. (2017). Principle component analysis of factors determining voter abstention in South Eastern Nigeria. Journal of Pan African Studies, 10(3), 249-273.
  21. Parker, M. T., & Isbell, L. M. (2010). How I vote depends on how I feel: The differential impact of anger and fear on political information processing. Psychological Science, 21(4), 548–550. doi: 10.1177/0956797610364006
  22. Scheuerman, J., Harman, J. L., Mattei, N., & Venable, K. B. (2017). Heuristic strategies in uncertain approval voting environments. PsyArXiv. https://arxiv.org/pdf/1905.12104.pdf
  23. Siswanto. (2014). Sosok presiden ideal dan tantangan isu-isu global: Menimbang aspek kepemimpinan Capres pada Pilpres 2014. Jurnal Penelitian Politik, 10(2), 1–13.
  24. Subanda, N. (2009). Analisis kritis terhadap fenomena golput dalam pemilu. Jurnal Konstitusi, 2(1), 60–72.
  25. Supriyadi, H. (2018). Gaya kepemimpinan presiden Indonesia. Jurnal Agregasi: Aksi Reformasi Government Dalam Demokrasi, 6(2), 139-148. doi: 10.34010/agregasi.v6i2.1136-
  26. Surbakti, R. (2019, Januari 8). Peserta pemilu dan partisipasi pemilih. Kompas. https://aipi.or.id/assets/pdf/pdf_file/08012019_PesertaPemiludanPartisipasiPemilih_Ramlan_Surbakti.pdf
  27. Tarsidi, D. Z., Nugraha, I., Fadhilah, F., & Pertiwi, G. (2019). Orientasi “poligami” (politik generasi milenial) dalam menghadapi pesta demokrasi 2019. Prosiding Seminar Nasional & Call Paper Psikologi Sosial 2019. Fakultas Pendidikan Psikologi Universitas Negeri Malang. http://fppsi.um.ac.id/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/Deni-Zein.pdf.
  28. Toor, S. U. R., & Ogunlana, S. (2009). Ineffective leadership: Investigating the negative attributes of leaders and organizational neutralizers. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 16(3), 254–272. doi: 10.1108/09699980910951663
  29. Voogd, R., Van Der Meer, T., & Van Der Brug, W. (2019). Political trust as a determinant of volatile vote intentions: Separating within- from between-person effects. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 31(4), 669–693. doi: 10.1093/ijpor/edy029
  30. Wang, C. H. (2016). Political trust, civic duty and voter turnout: The mediation argument. Social Science Journal, 53(3), 291–300. doi: 10.1016/j.soscij.2016.04.008
  31. Yanuarti, S. (2009). Golput dan pemilu di Indonesia. Jurnal Penelitian Politik, 6(1), 21–32.