Rethinking the dependent variable in voting behavior: On the measurement and analysis of electoral utilities

Electoral Studies

Volumn 25, Issue 3, 2006, Pages 424-447

  van der Eijk, Cees ^a   van der Brug, Wouter ^b   Kroh, Martin ^c   Franklin, Mark ^d  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NOTTINGHAM   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF AMSTERDAM   (Netherlands)

^c DIW BERLIN   (Germany)

^d TRINITY COLLEGE   (United States)

Author keywords

Comparative research; Discrete choice models; Electoral utility; Individual choice theory; Multiple party preferences

Indexed keywords

COMPARATIVE STUDY; ELECTORAL GEOGRAPHY; LOGIT ANALYSIS; PARTY POLITICS; VOTING BEHAVIOR;

EID: 33748143783     PISSN: 02613794     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.electstud.2005.06.012     Document Type: Article

References (59)

1. Aldrich J., and Nelson F. Linear Probability, Logit, and Probit Models (1984), Sage Publications, Beverly Hills
2. Alvarez R.M., and Nagler J. When politics and models collide: estimating models of multiparty elections. American Journal of Political Science 42 (1998) 55-96
3. Anker H., and Oppenhuis E. Dutch Parliamentary Election Study 1994 (1997), ICPSR, Ann Arbor (study nr. 6740)
4. Ben-Akiva M., and Lermanm S.R. Discrete Choice Analysis. Theory and Application to Travel Demand (1985), MIT Press, Cambridge
5. Böckenholt, U, 2001. Preference models with latent variables. In: International Encyclopaedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences.
6. Brams S.J., and Fishburn P.C. Approval voting. American Political Science Review 72 (1978) 831-847
7. Brennan G., and Lomansky L. Democracy and Decision (1993), The Pure Theory of Electoral Preference, Cambridge
8. van der Brug W. Issue ownership and party choice. Electoral Studies 23 (2004) 209-233
9. van der Brug W., and van der Eijk C. De campagne deed er toe, mediagebruik niet. In: van Praag Jr. P., and Brants K. (Eds). Tussen Beeld en Inhoud. Politiek en media in de verkiezingen van 1998 (2000), Het Spinhuis, Amsterdam
10. van der Brug W., and Fennema M. Protest or mainstream? How the European anti-immigrant parties have developed into two separate groups by 1999. European Journal of Political Research 42 (2003) 55-76
11. van der Brug W., Fennema M., and Tillie J. Anti-immigrant parties in Europe: ideological or protest vote. European Journal of Political Research 37 (2000) 77-102
12. van der Brug, W, van der Eijk, C, Franklin, M, 2001. The economy and the vote: electoral responses to economic conditions in 15 countries. Paper presented at the General Conference of the ECPR at the University of Kent, Canterbury, 6-8 September 2001.
13. van der Brug, W, van der Eijk, C, Franklin, M, 2002. The reasoning public: education, interest and political choices. Paper presented at the Joint Session of Workshops of the ECPR, Turin, March 2002.
14. van der Brug W., van der Eijk, C., Franklin, M., forthcoming. The Economy and the Vote. Effects of Economic Conditions on Voter Preferences and Election Outcomes in Fifteen Countries. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
15. Burden B.C. Deterministic and probabilistic voting models. American Journal of Political Science 41 (1997) 1150-1169
16. Camacho A. On Cardinal utility. Theory and Decision 10 (1979) 131-145
17. Camacho A. Approaches to cardinal utility. Theory and Decision 12 (1980) 359-379
18. Campbell A., Converse P.E., Miller W.E., and Stokes D.E. The American Voter (1960), Wiley, New York
19. Coombs C. A Theory of Data (1964), Wiley, New York
20. Downs A. An Economic Theory of Democracy (1957), Harper and Row, New York
21. van der Eijk C., Franklin M., et al. Choosing Europe? The European Electorate and National Politics in the Face of the Union (1996), University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor
22. van der Eijk C., Franklin M., and van der Brug W. Policy preferences and party choice. In: Schmitt H., and Thomassen J. (Eds). Political Representation and Legitimacy in the European Union (1999), Oxford University Press, Oxford
23. van der Eijk C., Franklin M., and Oppenhuis E. The strategic context: party choice. In: van der Eijk C., and Franklin M. (Eds). Choosing Europe? (1996), University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor, MI 332-365
24. van der Eijk C., and Niemöller B. Het potentiële electoraat van de Nederlandse politieke partijen. Beleid en Maatschappij 11 (1984) 192-204
25. van der Eijk C., and Oppenhuis E. European parties' performance in electoral competition. European Journal of Political Research 19 (1991) 55-80
26. Franklin M., van der Eijk C., and Oppenhuis E. The institutional context: turnout. In: van der Eijk C., and Franklin M. (Eds). Choosing Europe? (1996), University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor, MI 306-331
27. Glasgow G. Mixed logit models for multiparty elections. Political Analysis 9 (2001) 116-136
28. Iversen G. Contextual Analysis. Sage Series: Quantitative Applications in the Social Sciences (1991), Thousand Oaks, Sage
29. King G. Unifying Political Methodology (1989), Cambridge University Press, New York
30. Krantz D.H., Luce R.D., Suppes P., and Tversky A. Foundations of Measurement, vol. 1 (1971), Academic Press, New York
31. Kroh M. Parties, politicians and policies. Orientations of vote choice across voters and contexts. PhD dissertation (2003), University of Amsterdam
32. Kroh, M., van der Eijk, C., 2003. Utilities, preference and choice. Paper presented at Joint Sessions of Workshops, ECPR, Edinburgh.
33. Lancaster K. A new approach to consumer theory. Journal of Political Economy 74 (1966) 132-157
34. Lazarsfeld P., Berelson B., and Gaudet H. The People's Choice. How the Voter Makes up his Mind in a Presidential Campaign (1944), Columbia University Press, New York
35. Luce R. Individual Choice Behavior: A Theoretical Analysis (1959), Wiley, New York
36. Luce R.D. Utility of Certain and Uncertain Alternatives: Measurement, Theoretic and Experimental Approaches (1999), Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ
37. Luce R., and Suppes P. Preference, utility, and subjective probability. In: Luce R., Bush R., and Galanter E. (Eds). Handbook of Mathematical Psychology vol. 3 (1965), Wiley, New York
38. Maas K., Steenbergen M., and Saris W. Vote probabilities. Electoral Studies 9 (1990) 91-107
39. MacDonald S., Listhaug O., and Rabinowitz G. Issues and party support in multiparty systems. American Political Science Review 85 (1991) 1107-1132
40. Manski C. The structure of random utility models. Theory and Decision 8 (1977) 229-254
41. Manski C., and McFadden D. Alternative estimators and sample design for discrete choice analysis. In: Manski C., and McFadden D. (Eds). Structural Analysis of Discrete Choice Data with Econometric Applications (1981), MIT Press, Cambridge
42. Marsh M. Stability and change in structure of electoral competition 1989-2002. In: Payne D., Garry J., and Hardiman N. (Eds). Facing Change in a New Ireland: An Analysis of Irish Social and Political Attitudes (2005), Liverpool University Press, Liverpool
43. McFadden D. Conditional logit analysis of qualitative choice behavior. In: Zarembka P. (Ed). Frontiers in Econometrics (1973), Academic Press, New York
44. Oppenhuis E. Voting Behavior in Europe (1995), Het Spinhuis, Amsterdam
45. Przeworski A., and Teune H. The Logic of Comparative Social Inquiry (1970), Wiley, New York
46. Quinn K.M., Andrew D.M., and Whitford A.B. Voter choice in multi-party democracies: a test of competing theories and models. American Journal of Political Science 43 (1999) 1231-1247
47. Rabinowitz G., and MacDonald S. A directional theory of issue voting. American Political Science Review 83 (1989) 93-121
48. van Schuur W.H. Structure in Political Beliefs. A New Model for Stochastic Unfolding with Application to European Party Activists (1984), CT Press, Amsterdam
49. van Schuur W.H. Nonparametric unidimensional unfolding for multicategory data. Political Analysis 4 (1993) 41-74
50. Simon H. Models of Man (1957), Wiley, New York
51. Snijders T., and Bosker R. Multilevel Analysis: An Introduction to Basic and Advanced Multilevel Modeling (1999), Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks
52. Stimson J.A. Regression in space and time: a statistical essay. American Journal of Political Science 29 (1985) 914-947
53. Thomassen J. From comparable to comparative electoral research. In: van Deth J., Rattinger H., and Roller E. (Eds). Die Republik auf dem Weg zur Normalität? (2000), Leske en Budrich, Opladen
54. Thurner P.W. The empirical application of the spatial theory of voting in multiparty systems with random utility models. Electoral Studies 19 (2000) 493-517
55. Thurstone L. A law of comparative judgment. Psychological Review 34 (1927) 273-286
56. Thurstone L. The Measurement of Values (1959), University of Chicago Press, Chicago
57. Tillie J. Party Utility and Voting Behavior (1995), Het Spinhuis, Amsterdam
58. Train K.E. Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation (2003), Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
59. Whitten G., and Palmer H. Heightening comparativists concern for model choice - voting behavior in Great Britain and the Netherlands. American Journal of Political Science 40 (1996) 231-260