Views on what qualities elected representatives should embody vary among individuals. Some argue that legislators should fulfill the promises they made during their campaigns, while others believe they should adapt their viewpoints in response to opinion dynamics. This paper evaluates from the electorate’s perspective whether legislators should adhere to their commitments or shift their stances. To address this question, an online experimental design was employed, dividing the study into six experimental groups: three groups assessed voter evaluations when legislators maintained their positions, and the other three evaluated changes in legislators’ stances. Furthermore, this study delves into whether voters’ perceptions differ when legislators persist in their positions or alter them under various types of pressure, including those stemming from their political parties, national public opinion, or constituency opinion.
The experimental outcomes indicate that voters rate legislators who keep their promises higher than those who change their positions. Among the steadfast legislators, the evaluation varies depending on the nature of the conflict arising from their firm stance against different kinds of pressure. Legislators who stand firm against party conflicts receive the highest approval from participants, followed by those who resist national public opinion and lastly, those who resist constituency opinion.
Conversely, for legislators who change their positions, voter evaluations are inversely related; those who shift due to party pressure are rated lowest, followed by shifts due to national public opinion. Voters are most accepting of changes made in response to constituency opinion.