Over the past few weeks Maltese households have been bombarded by mail from political parties and candidates listing the reasons why people should vote for them.
But how persuasive are these fliers and on what grounds do citizens choose who to give their precious vote to?
One 31-year-old mother said that throughout this campaign she has kept abreast of the parties' policies yet, she confessed, she could not imagine voting for a party other than the one her family supported.
Clearly, in our community, family has a strong influence on voting behaviour. Anthropologist Mark-Anthony Falzon believes that political affiliation runs in families but it is crucial not to think of individuals as "hereditary automatons" who passively back whoever their parents support.
Another voter revealed how, in the past, she would vote as her father told her to but, today, she listens to what the parties have to say first. In the end, she still votes for the same party as her family.
Political affiliation, Dr Falzon explained, may be thought of as an inherited political space where individuals inherit the affiliation to the particular party but then go on to develop their own views within that space - like this voter did.
Having said that, political affiliation is not cast in stone and some people do "cross over". This shift of allegiance, Dr Falzon said, may happen due to individual circumstances such as disgruntlement over some private matter or during episodes of significant social change.
A new social sphere is what led a 58-year-old man to shift parties. He was inclined towards one party, like the majority of his family, but he eventually grew to disagree with the way that party operated and shifted towards another.
"When you cast the vote it is important to think of the future... For example, while I would like to hunt during spring, this will not be the only thing I base my vote on. I like to look at the bigger picture and at the good of the nation apart from issues that affect only me," he said.
This leads to another question: Is it personal issues or national interest that determine the way people vote? Dr Falzon believes it is the first.
"People may die and kill for nations but they won't vote for them," he said, adding that lofty ideas about the common good overriding personal interest should be taken with a pinch of salt as the common good is often defined with reference to personal interest.
He explained that for a trapper, for instance, the common good would be more trapped birds, while for a birdwatcher it would be freer birds.
Dr Falzon also pointed out that one had to keep in mind the proximity of politics in Malta.
"We don't just vote for our politicians. We know them personally in many cases or, at least, we know someone who does. They are easily accessible and this gives Maltese politics a feeling of intimacy."
In fact, a woman admitted that she votes for candidates she likes on a personal level. Her friend, however, said she voted for candidates on the basis of their track record or ambitions. They both however agreed that they only considered voting for those candidates who belonged to the party they supported - indicating that, put in Dr Falzon's words, "parties make candidates, not the other way round".
One question remained: Is there any such thing as an ideal way to vote?
"This would be going against the basic principle of democracy. It is not just who to vote for but how to go about making up one's mind that should be the free choice of the individual," Dr Falzon concluded.