How voters work around institutions: Policy balancing in staggered elections

Electoral Studies

Volumn 25, Issue 3, 2006, Pages 509-527

  Kedar, Orit ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN   (United States)

Author keywords

Compensational voting; Elections; Federal; Germany; Policy balancing; Staggered

Indexed keywords

ELECTION; ELECTORAL SYSTEM; VOTING BEHAVIOR;

CENTRAL EUROPE; EURASIA; EUROPE; GERMANY;

EID: 33748322017     PISSN: 02613794     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.electstud.2005.06.011     Document Type: Article

References (42)

1. Aardal, B., and Valen, H. Norwegian Election Study 1989 [computer file]. Norwegian Gallup Institute [producer]. Norwegian Social Science Data Services (NSD) [distributor].
2. Alesina A., and Rosenthal H. Partisan Politics, Divided Government, and the Economy (1995), Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (Chapters 1-4)
3. Anderson C.J. Barometer elections in comparative perspective. Electoral Studies 15 4 (1996) 447-460
4. Austen-Smith D., and Banks J. Elections, coalitions, and legislative outcomes. American Political Science Review 82 2 (1988) 405-422
5. Barnes S.H. Electoral behavior and comparative politics. In: Lichbach M.I., and Zuckerman A.S. (Eds). Comparative Politics: Rationality, Culture, and Structure (1997), Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 115-141
6. Baron D.P., and Diermeier D. Elections, governments, and parliaments in proportional representation systems. Quarterly Journal of Economics 116 3 (2001) 933-967
7. Blais A., et al. The formation of party preferences: testing the proximity and directional models. European Journal of Political Research 40 1 (2001) 81-91
8. Cho S., and Endersby J.W. Issues, the spatial theory of voting, and British general elections: a comparison of proximity and directional models. Public Choice 114 (2003) 275-293
9. Converse P.E. The nature of belief systems in mass publics. In: Apter D.E. (Ed). Ideology and Discontent (1964), Free Press, New York 206-261
10. Downs A. An Economic Theory of Democracy (1957), Harper & Row, New York
11. Edelman M. The Symbolic Uses of Politics (1964), University of Illinois Press, Urbana
12. Enelow J.M., and Hinich M.J. The Spatial Theory of Voting: An Introduction (1984), Cambridge University Press, New York
13. Fiorina M. Divided Government (1996), Allyn and Bacon, Massachusetts
14. Granberg D., and Gilljam M. Implausible hypotheses in the directional theory of issue voting. European Journal of Political Research 32 (1997) 31-50
15. Grofman B. The neglected role of the status quo in models of issue voting. Journal of Politics 45 (1985) 230-237
16. Hotelling H. Stability and competition. Economic Journal 39 (1929) 41-59
17. Iversen T. Political leadership and representation in West European democracies: a test of three models of voting. American Journal of Political Science 38 1 (1994) 45-74
18. Iversen T. The logics of electoral politics. Comparative Political Studies 27 2 (1994) 155-189
19. Kedar, 2003a. Policy balancing in comparative context: institutional mediation of voter behavior. Dissertation submitted to the Department of Government at Harvard University.
20. Kedar, O., 2003b. Who prefers extreme parties: voter sophistication and policy balancing. Paper prepared for delivery at the Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, August 28-31, 2003. Philadelphia, PA.
21. Kedar, O., 2005. How diffusion of power in parliaments affects voter choice. Forthcoming, Political Analysis Fall 2005.
22. Krämer J., and Rattinger H. The proximity and the directional theories of issue voting: comparative results for the U.S. and Germany. European Journal of Political Science 32 (1997) 1-29
23. Lacy D., and Paolino P. Downsian voting and the separation of powers. American Journal of Political Science 42 4 (1998) 1180-1199
24. Lewis J.B., and King G. No evidence on directional vs. proximity voting. Political Analysis 8 1 (2000) 21-33
25. Lohman S., Brady D.W., and Rivers D. Party identification, retrospective voting, and moderating elections in a federal system: West Germany, 1961-1989. Comparative Political Studies 30 4 (1997) 420-449
26. Mebane Jr. W.R. Coordination, moderation, and institutional balancing in American presidential and House elections. American Political Science Review 94 1 (2000) 37-58
27. Mebane Jr. W.R., and Sekhon J.S. Coordination and policy moderation at midterm. American Political Science Review 96 1 (2002) 141-157
28. Macdonald S.E., Listhug O., and Rabinowitz G. Issues and party support in multiparty systems. American Political Science Review 85 4 (1991) 1107-1131
29. Macdonald S.E., Rabinowitz G., and Listhaug O. Political sophistication and models of issue voting. British Journal of Political Science 25 (1995) 453-483
30. Macdonald S.E., Rabinowitz G., and Listhaug O. On attempting to rehabilitate the proximity model: sometimes the patient just can't be helped. Journal of Politics 60 3 (1998) 653-690
31. Macdonald S.E., Rabinowitz G., and Listhaug O. Sophistry versus science: on further efforts to rehabilitate the proximity model. Journal of Politics 63 May (2001) 482-500
32. Marsh M. Testing the second-order election model after four European elections. British Journal of Political Science 28 (1998) 591-607
33. Marsh M., and Franklin M.N. The foundations: unanswered questions from the study of European elections, 1979-1994. In: Van der Eijk C., and Franklin M.N. (Eds). Choosing Europe? The European Electorate and National Politics in the Face of Union (1996), The University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor 11-32
34. Pierce R. Directional versus proximity models: verisimilitude as the criterion. Journal of Theoretic Politics 9 (1997) 61-74
35. Przeworski A., and Sprague J. Paper Stones: A History of Electoral Socialism (1986), University of Chicago Press, Chicago
36. Rabinowitz G. On the nature of political issues: insights from a spatial analysis. American Journal of Political Science 22 4 (1978) 793-817
37. Rabinowitz G., and Macdonald S.E. A directional theory of issue voting. American Political Science Review 83 1 (1989) 93-121
38. Schuessler A.A. A Logic of Expressive Choice (2000), Princeton University Press, Princeton
39. Shugart M.S. The electoral cycle and institutional sources of divided presidential government. American Political Science Review 89 2 (1995) 327-343
40. Strøm K. Minority Government and Majority Rule (1990), Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
41. The National Election Studies and the Comparative Study of Electoral Systems, Center for Political Studies, University of Michigan. Electronic resources from the NES World Wide Web site (http://www.umich.edu/~nes). Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan, Center for Political Studies [producer and distributor], 1995-1998, 1998-2002.
42. Westholm A. Distance versus direction: the illusory defeat of the proximity theory of electoral choice. American Political Science Review 91 4 (1997) 865-885