Candidate positioning and voter choice

被引:107
作者
Tomz, Michael [1 ]
Van Houweling, Robert P. [2 ]
机构
[1] Stanford Univ, Stanford, CA 94305 USA
[2] Univ Calif Berkeley, Berkeley, CA 94720 USA
基金
美国国家科学基金会;
关键词
D O I
10.1017/S0003055408080301
中图分类号
D0 [政治学、政治理论];
学科分类号
0302 ; 030201 ;
摘要
This article examines a fundamental aspect of democracy: the relationship between the policy positions of candidates and the choices of voters. Researchers have suggested three criteria-proximity, direction, and discounting - by which voters might judge candidates' policy positions. More than 50 peer-reviewed articles, employing data from more than 20 countries, have attempted to adjudicate among these theories. We explain why existing data and methods are insufficient to estimate the prevalence of these criteria in the electorate. We then formally derive an exhaustive set of critical tests: situations in which the criteria predict different vote choices. Finally, through survey experiments concerning health care policy, we administer the tests to a nationally representative sample. We find that proximity voting is about twice as common as discounting and four times as common as directional voting. Furthermore, discounting is most prevalent among ideological centrists and nonpartisans, who make sophisticated judgments that help align policy with their preferences. These findings demonstrate the promise of combining formal theory and experiments to answer previously intractable questions about democracy.
引用
收藏
页码:303 / 318
页数:16
相关论文
共 31 条
[1]   Representation in congressional campaigns: Evidence for discounting/directional voting in US Senate elections [J].
Adams, J ;
Bishin, BG ;
Dow, JK .
JOURNAL OF POLITICS, 2004, 66 (02) :348-373
[2]  
Adams James., 2005, A Unified Theory of Party Competition: A Cross-National Analysis Integrating Spatial and Behavioral Factors
[3]   Feeling thermometers versus 7-point scales - Which are better? [J].
Alwin, DF .
SOCIOLOGICAL METHODS & RESEARCH, 1997, 25 (03) :318-340
[4]  
Anthony Downs., 1957, An economic theory of democracy
[5]   ROBUSTNESS OF THE MULTIDIMENSIONAL VOTING MODEL - CANDIDATE MOTIVATIONS, UNCERTAINTY, AND CONVERGENCE [J].
CALVERT, RL .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF POLITICAL SCIENCE, 1985, 29 (01) :69-95
[6]   Ideology and evaluation in an experimental setting - Comparing the proximity and the directional models [J].
Claassen, Ryan L. .
POLITICAL RESEARCH QUARTERLY, 2007, 60 (02) :263-273
[8]  
Dahl RA., 1971, POLYARCHY PARTICIPAT
[9]  
Fiorina Morris P., 1992, DIVIDED GOVT
[10]   Downs and two-party convergence [J].
Grofman, B .
ANNUAL REVIEW OF POLITICAL SCIENCE, 2004, 7 :25-46