Winning at the polls and in the polls: The incumbency advantage in surveys of U.S. house voters

Electoral Studies

Volumn 17, Issue 4, 1998, Pages 443-461

  Mattei, Franco ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY AT BUFFALO   (United States)

Author keywords

Incumbency; Measurement error; National election studies; Response bias; U.S. house elections

Indexed keywords

ELECTORAL GEOGRAPHY; NATIONAL POLITICS; VOTING BEHAVIOR;

UNITED STATES;

EID: 0032400876     PISSN: 02613794     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/s0261-3794(98)00012-2     Document Type: Article

References (21)

1. Abramowitz, Alan (1981) Party and Individual Accountability in the 1978 Congressional Election. In Congressional Elections, ed. L. Sandy Maisel and Joseph Cooper, pp. 171-193. Sage Publications, Beverly Hills.
2. Asher, Herbert (1995) Polling and the Public. CQ Press, Washington.
3. Box-Steffensmeier, Janet M. and Jacobson Gary C. (1995) Question Wording and the House Vote: Some Experimental Evidence. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Southern Political Science Association, 1-4 November, Tampa, Florida.
4. Cover, A. D. (1977) One good term deserves another: the advantage of incumbency in congressional elections. American Journal of Political Science 21, 523-541.
5. Cox, G. W. and Katz, J. N. (1996) Why did the incumbency advantage in U.S. house elections grow. American Journal of Political Science 40, 478-497.
6. Eubank, R. B. (1985) Incumbent effects on individual-level voting behavior in congressional elections: a decade of exaggeration. Journal of Politics 47, 958-967.
7. Eubank, R. B. and Gow, D. J. (1983) The pro-incumbent bias in the 1978 and 1980 national election studies. American Journal of Political Science 27, 122-139.
8. Fowler, L. L. (1995) Review of challengers, competition, and reelection: comparing senate and house elections by Jonathan S. Krasno. American Political Science Review 89, 1024-1025.
9. Gelman, A. and King, G. (1990) Estimating incumbency advantage without bias. American Journal of Political Science 34, 1142-1164.
10. Gow, D. J. and Eubank, R. B. (1984) The pro-incumbent bias in the 1982 national election study. American Journal of Political Science 28, 224-230.
11. Gronke, P. (1992) Overreporting the vote in the 1988 senate election study: a response to Wright. Legislative Studies Quarterly 17, 113-129.
12. Jacobson, G. C. (1981) Congressional elections, 1978: the case of the vanishing challengers. In Congressional Elections, ed. L. Sandy Maisel and Joseph Cooper, pp. 219-247. Sage Publications, Beverly Hills.
13. Jacobson, G. C. (1997) The Politics of Congressional Elections. Longman, New York.
14. Jacobson, G. C. and Rivers, D. (1993) Explaining the overreport of vote for incumbents in the national election studies. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Western Political Science Association, 18-20 March, Pasadena, California.
15. Kelley, S. and Mirer, T. W. (1974) The simple act of voting. American Political Science Review 68, 572-591.
16. Mann, T. E. and Wolfinger, R. E. (1980) Candidates and parties in congressional elections. American Political Science Review 74, 617-632.
17. Noelle-Neumann, E. (1993) The Spiral of Silence. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
18. Schuman, H. and Presser, S. (1981) Questions and Answers in Attitude Surveys: Experiments on Question Form, Wording, and Context. Academic Press, New York.
19. Wright, G. C. (1990) Misreports of vote choice in the 1988 NES senate election study. Legislative Studies Quarterly 15, 543-563.
20. Wright, G. C. (1992) Reported versus actual vote: there is a difference and it matters. Legislative Studies Quarterly 17, 131-142.
21. Wright, G. C. (1993) Errors in measuring vote choice in the national election studies 1952-1988. American Journal of Political Science 37, 291-316.