Not always second order: Subnational elections, national-level vote intentions, and volatility spillovers in a multi-level electoral system

Electoral Studies

Volumn 31, Issue 1, 2012, Pages 170-183

  Bechtel, Michael M ^a  

^a ETH ZURICH   (Switzerland)

Author keywords

Electoral campaigns; Electoral institutions; Multi level systems; Subnational elections; Vote intentions

Indexed keywords

ELECTION; ELECTORAL SYSTEM; NUMERICAL MODEL; POLITICAL SYSTEM; UNCERTAINTY ANALYSIS;

EID: 84857238742     PISSN: 02613794     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.electstud.2011.10.005     Document Type: Article

References (59)

1. Alesina A., Rosenthal H. Partisan Politics, Divided Government, and the Economy 1995, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge/New York.
2. Anderson C.J., Ward D.S. Barometer elections in comparative perspective. Electoral Studies 1996, 15(4):447-460.
3. Bechtel M.M., Hainmueller J. How lasting is voter gratitude? An analysis of the short- and long-termelectoral returns to beneficial policy. American Journal of Political Science 2011, 55(4):852-868.
4. Beck N. Time-varying parameter regression models. American Journal of Political Science 1983, 27(3):557-600.
5. Bollerslev T. Generalized Autoregressive conditional heteroscedasticity. Journal of Econometrics 1986, 31(3):307-327.
6. Bollerslev T., Wooldridge J.M. Quasi-maximum likelihood estimation and inference in dynamic models with time-varying covariances. Econometric Review 1992, 11(2):143-172.
7. Bräuninger T., Debus M. Der Einfluss von Koalitionsaussagen, programmatischen Standpunkten und der Bundespolitik auf die Regierungsbildung in den deutschen Ländern. Politische Vierteljahresschrift 2008, 49(2):309-338.
8. Brambor T., Clark W.R., Golder M. Understanding interaction models: improving empirical analyses. Political Analysis 2006, 14(1):63-82.
9. Clarke H.D., Stewart M.C., Whiteley P.F. New models for New Labour: the political economy of Labour party support, January 1992-April 1997. American Political Science Review 1998, 92(3):559-575.
10. Cox G.W., Katz J.N. Elbridge Gerry's Salamander 2002, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
11. Cox K.E., Schoppa L.J. Interaction effects in mixed-member electoral systems. Comparative Political Studies 2002, 35(9):1027-1053.
12. Debus M. Party competition and government formation in multilevel settings: evidence from Germany. Government and Opposition 2008, 43(4):505-538.
13. Decker F., von Blumenthal J. Die bundespolitische Durchdringung der Landtagswahlen. Eine empirische Analyse von 1970 bis 2001. Zeitschrift für Parlamentsfragen 2002, 33(1):144-165.
14. Dinkel R. Der Zusammenhang zwischen Bundes- und Landtagswahlergebnissen. Politische Vierteljahresschrift 1977, 18(2):348-359.
15. Downs G.W., Rocke D.M. Interpreting heteroscedasticity. American Journal of Political Science 1979, 23(4):816-828.
16. Duverger M. Electoral Laws and Their Political Consequences 1986, Agathon, New York.
17. Engle R.F. Autoregressive conditional heteroscedasticity with estimates of the variance of U.K. Inflation. Econometrica 1982, 50(4):987-1008.
18. Fiorina M.P. Divided government in the states. PS: Political Science and Politics 1991, 24(4):646-650.
19. Fiorina M.P. Economic retrospective voting in American national elections: a micro-analysis. American Journal of Political Science 1978, 22(2):426-443.
20. Finkel S.E. Reexamining the 'Minimal effects' model in recent presidential campaigns. Journal of Politics 1993, 55(1):1-21.
21. Franklin C.H. Eschewing Obfuscation? Campaigns and the perception of U.S. senate incumbents. American Political Science Review 1991, 85(4):1193-1214.
22. Gaines B.J., Crombez C. Another look at connections across German elections. Journal of Theoretical Politics 2004, 16(3):289-319.
23. Gelman A., King G. Why are American Presidential Presidential election campaign polls so variable when votes are so predictable. British Journal of Political Science 1993, 23(4):409-451.
24. Gerber E.R., Lupia A. Campaign competition and policy responsiveness in direct legislation election. Political Behavior 1995, 17(3):287-306.
25. Gronke P., Brehm J. History, heterogeneity, and presidential approval: a modified ARCH approach. Electoral Studies 2002, 21(3):435-452.
26. Gschwend T. Berliner Abgeordnetenwahlen 1979 bis 2001: keine Testwahlen für die Bundesebene. Zeitschrift für Parlamentsfragen 2007, 38(3):531-540.
27. Geschwend T., Leuffen D. Divided we stand - unified we govern? Cohabitation and regime voting in the 2002 French elections. British Journal of Political Science 2005, 35(4):691-712.
28. Hainmüller J., Kern H.L. Incumbency as a source of spillover effects in mixed electoral systems: evidence from a regression-discontinuity design. Electoral Studies 2008, 27(2):213-227.
29. Hennl A., Kaiser A. Ticket-balancing in mixed-member proportional systems. comparing sub-national elections in Germany. Electoral Studies 2008, 27(2):321-336.
30. Herron E.S., Nishikawa M. Contamination effects and the number of parties in mixed-superposition electoral systems. Electral Studies 2001, 20(1):63-86.
31. Jensen J.M., Beyle T. Of footnotes, missing data, and lessons for 50-state data collection: the gubernatorial campaign finance project, 1977-2001. State Politics and Policy Quarterly 2003, 3(2):203-214.
32. Jackson R.A. The mobilization of U.S. State electorates in the 1988 and 1990 elections. Journal of Politics 1997, 59(2):520-537.
33. Jacobson G.C., Kernell S. Strategy and Choice in Congressional Elections 1983, Yale University Press, New Haven/London.
34. Kam C.D., Franzese R.J. Modeling and Interpreting Interactive Hypotheses in Regression Analyses 2007, University of Michigan Press, Michigan.
35. Karp J.A. Candidate effects and spill-over in mixed systems: evidence from New Zealand. Electoral Studies 2009, 28(1):41-50.
36. Kedar O. How voters work around institutions: policy balancing in staggered elections. Electoral Studies 2006, 25(3):509-527.
37. Kern H.L., Hainmüller J. Electoral balancing, divided government, and midterm loss in German state elections. Journal of Legislative Studies 2006, 12(2):127-149.
38. Kriner D., Schwartz L. Partisan dynamics and the volatility of presidential approval. British Journal of Political Science 2009, 39(3):609-631.
39. Kopstein J., Ziblatt D. Honecker's revenge. The enduring legacy of German unification in the 2005 election. German Politics and Society 2006, 24(1):134-147.
40. Lewis-Beck M.S., Paldam M. Economic voting: an introduction. Electoral Studies 2000, 19(2):113-121.
41. Lohmann S., Brady D.W., Rivers D. Party identification, retrospective voting, and moderating elections in a federal system. Comparative Political Studies 1997, 30(4):420-449.
42. Matthews J.S., Johnston R. The campaign dynamics of economic voting. Electoral Studies 2010, 29(1):13-24.
43. Miller W.L., Mackie M. The electoral cycle and the asymmetry of government and opposition popularity: an alternative model of the relationship between economic conditions and political popularity. Political Studies 1973, 21(3):263-279.
44. Norris P., Sanders D. Message or medium? Campaign learning during the 2001 British general election. Political Communication 2003, 20(3):233-262.
45. Peterson D.A.M. Campaign learning and vote determinants. American Journal of Political Science 2009, 53(2):445-460.
46. Powell B.G., Whitten G.D. A cross-national analysis of economic voting: taking account of the political context. American Journal of Political Science 1993, 37(2):391-414.
47. Putnam R.D. Diplomacy and domestic politics: the logic of two-level games. International Organization 1988, 42(3):427-460.
48. Reif K., Schmitt H. Nine second-order national elections: a conceptual framework for the analysis of European election results. European Journal of Political Research 1980, 8(1):3-44.
49. Samuels D.J. The gubernatorial coattails effect: federalism and congressional elections in Brazil. Journal of Politics 2000, 62(1):240-253.
50. Schelling T.C. The Strategy of Conflict 1960, Harvard University Press, Cambridge (Mass.).
51. Schain M.A. Immigration and changes in the French party system. European Journal of Political Science 2006, 16(6):597-621.
52. Scheve K., Tomz M. Electoral surprise and the midterm loss in US congressional elections. British Journal of Political Science 1999, 29(3):507-521.
53. Schultz K.A. Domestic opposition and signaling in international crises. American Political Science Review 1998, 92(4):829-844.
54. Shaw D.R., Roberts B.E. Campaign events, the media and the prospects of victory: the 1992 and 1996 US presidential elections. British Journal of Political Science 2000, 30(2):259-289.
55. Selb P. Supersized votes: ballot length, uncertainty, and choice in direct legislation elections. Public Choice 2008, 135(3-4):319-336.
56. Stevenson R.T., Vavreck L. Does campaign length matter? Testing for cross-national effects. British Journal of Political Science 2000, 30(2):217-235.
57. Wattenberg M.P. The decline of party mobilization. Parties Without Partisans. Political Change in Advanced Industrial Democracies 2000, 64-78. Oxford University Press, Oxford. R.J. Dalton, M.P. Wattenberg (Eds.).
58. Weisberg H.F. Partisanship and incumbency in presidential elections. Political Behavior 2002, 24(4):339-360.
59. Wlezien C., Erickson R.S. The timeline of presidential election campaigns. Journal of Politics 2002, 64(4):969-993.