Cross-National Yardstick Comparisons: A Choice Experiment on a Forgotten Voter Heuristic

Political Behavior

Volumn 37, Issue 4, 2015, Pages 767-789

  Hansen, Kasper M ^a   Olsen, Asmus L ^a   Bech, Mickael ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF COPENHAGEN   (Denmark)

^b UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN DENMARK   (Denmark)

Author keywords

Conjoint experiment; Discrete choice experiment; Economic voting; Social comparison; Yardstick comparison

Indexed keywords

EID: 84944135406     PISSN: 01909320     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11109-014-9288-y     Document Type: Article

References (81)

1. Alvarez, R. M., Nagler, J., & Willette, J. R. (2000). Measuring the relative impact of issues and the economy in democratic elections. Electoral Studies,19(2–3), 237–253.
2. Ansolabehere, S., Meredith, M., & Snowberg, E. (2012). Asking about numbers: Why and how. Political Analysis,21(1), 48–69.
3. Baumeister, R. F., Bratslavsky, E., Finkenauer, C., & Vohs, K. D. (2001). Bad is stronger than good. Review of General Psychology,5(4), 323–370.
4. Bechtel, M. M., Hainmueller, J., & Margalit, Y. M. (2012). Studying public opinion on multidimensional policies: The case of the Eurozone bailouts. Working Paper No. 2012-27. MIT: Political-Science Department.
5. Bellucci, P., & Lewis-Beck, M. S. (2011). A stable popularity function? Cross-national analysis. European Journal of Political Research,50(2), 190–211.
6. Bellucci, P., Lobo, M. C., & Lewis-Beck, M. S. (2012). Economic crisis and elections: The European periphery. Electoral Studies,31(3), 469–471.
7. Bennett, J., & Blamey, R. (2001). The choice modeling approach to environmental evaluation. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Pub.
8. Besley, T., & Case, A. (1995). Incumbent behavior: Vote-seeking, tax-setting, and yardstick competition. The American Economic Review,85(1), 25–45.
9. Bloom, H. S., & Price, H. D. (1975). Voter Response to short-run economic conditions: The asymmetric effect of prosperity and Recession. American Political Science Review,69(4), 1240–1254.
10. Borre, O. (1997). Economic voting in Danish electoral surveys 1987-1994. Scandinavian Political Studies,20(4), 347–365.
11. Bosch, N., & Solé-Ollé, A. (2007). Yardstick competition and the political costs of raising taxes: An empirical analysis of Spanish municipalities. International Tax and Public Finance,14(1), 71–92.
12. Boyne, G., James, O., John, P., & Petrovsky, N. (2009). Democracy and government performance: Holding incumbents accountable in English local governments. Journal of Politics,71(4), 1273–1284.
13. Brickman, P., & Campbell, D. T. (1971). Hedonic relativism and planning the good society. In M. H. Apley (Ed.) Adaptation level theory. A symposium (pp. 287–302). New York: Academic Press.
14. Campbell, A., Converse, P. E., Miller, E. W., & Stokes, D. (1960). The American Voter. New York: Wiley.
15. Claggett, W. (1986). A reexamination of the asymmetry hypothesis: Economic expansions, contractions, and congressional elections. Western Political Quarterly,39(4), 623–633.
16. Diener, E. (2000). Subjective well-being: The science of happiness and a proposal for a national index. American Psychologist,55(1), 34.
17. DNES (2011). Danish national election study 2011. www.valgprojektet.dk.
18. Dorussen, H., & Palmer, H. D. (2002). The context of economic voting—an introduction. In H. Dorussen & M. Taylor (Eds.), Economic voting (pp. 1–14). London: Routledge.
19. Downs, A. (1957). An economic theory of democracy. New York: Harper and Row.
20. Duch, R. M., & Stevenson, R. (2008). Voting in context: How political and economic institutions condition election results. Cambridge: Cambridge University.
21. Duch, R. M., & Stevenson, R. (2010). The global economy, competency, and the economic vote. Journal of Politics,72(1), 105–123.
22. Festinger, L. (1954). A theory of social comparison processes. Human Relations,7(2), 117–140.
23. Gilardi, F. (2010). Who learns from what in policy diffusion processes? American Journal of Political Science,54(3), 650–666.
24. Goul Andersen, J. (2013). Den økonomiske udvikling op til 2011-valget. In R. Stubager, K. M. Hansen & J. Goul Andersen (eds.) Krisevalg - Økonomien og folketingsvalget 2011 (pp. 45–59). Copenhagen: DJØF-forlag.
25. Hainmueller, J., Hopkins, D., & Yamamoto, T. (2014). Causal inference in conjoint analysis: Understanding multidimensional choices via stated preference experiments. Political Analysis,22(1), 1–30.
26. Hansen, K. M., & Bech, M. (2007). De sociotropiske vælgere: Ønsket om stigende beskæftigelse betyder mere end hvem der bliver statsminister og vælgerne kan ikke købes med lønstigninger. Politica,39(1), 67–86.
27. Hansen, K. M., & Bech, M. (2012). Forcing voters to choose by using discrete choice experiments to estimate political preferences. Working Paper no. 2012-3. Centre for Parties and Voting, Department of Political Science, University of Copenhagen.
28. Hansen, K. M., & Goul Andersen, J. (2013). En samlet model for partivalg. In Stubager, R., K. M. Hansen & J. Goul Andersen (Eds.) Krisevalg - Økonomien og folketingsvalget 2011 (pp. 189–212). Copenhagen: DJØF-forlag.
29. Headrick, B., & Lanoue, D. J. (1991). Attention, asymmetry, and government popularity in britain. Political Research Quarterly,44(1), 67–86.
30. Healy, A., & Malhotra, N. (2013). Retrospective voting reconsidered. Annual Review of Political Science,16, 285–306.
31. Hellwig, T. T. (2001). Interdependence, government constraints, and economic voting. Journal of Politics,63(4), 1141–1162.
32. Hellwig, T. T., & Samuels, D. (2007). Voting in open economies: The electoral consequences of globalization. Comparative Political Studies,40(3), 283–306.
33. Hopkins, D. J. (2011). Whose economy? Perceptions of national economic performance during unequal growth. Public Opinion Quarterly,76(1), 50–71.
34. Huber, G. A., Hill, S. J., & Lenz, G. S. (2012). Sources of bias in retrospective decision making: Experimental evidence on voters’ limitations in controlling incumbents. American Political Science Review,106(4), 720–741.
35. Johnson, T. R. (2007). Discrete choice models for ordinal response variables: A generalization of the stereotype model. Psychometrika,72(4), 489–504.
36. Kahneman, D., Knetsch, J. L., & Thaler, R. H. (1991). Anomalies: The endowment effect, loss aversion, and status quo bias. The Journal of Economic Perspectives,5(1), 193–206.
37. Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1979). Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica,47(2), 263–291.
38. Kappe, R. (2013). Asymmetric evaluations: Government popularity and economic performance in the United Kingdom. Paper presented at the EPOP conference, Lancaster University, UK.
39. Kayser, M. A., & Peress, M. (2012). Benchmarking across Borders: Electoral accountability and the necessity of comparison. American Political Science Review,106(3), 661–684.
40. Kiewiet, D. R. (1983). Macroeconomic and micropolitics: The electoral effects of economic issues. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
41. Kiewiet, D. R., & Lewis-Beck, M. S. (2012). No man is an Island: Self-interest, the public interest, and sociotropic voting. Critical Review: A Journal of Politics and Society,23(3), 303–319.
42. Kinder, D. R., & Kiewiet, D. R. (1981). Sociotropic politics: The American case. British Journal of Political Science,11(2), 129–161.
43. Kramer, G. (1983). The ecological fallacy revisited: Aggregate- versus individual-level findings on economics and elections, and sociotropic voting. American Political Science Review,77(1), 92–111.
44. Kuhfeld, W. F. (2005). Marketing research methods in sas: Experimental design, choice, conjoint, and graphical techniques. SAS Institute, SAS 9.1 Edition, TS-722.
45. Lanoue, D. J. (1987). Economic prosperity and presidential popularity: Sorting out the effects. Western Political Quarterly,40(2), 237–245.
46. Lau, R. R. (1982). Negativity in political perception. Political Behavior,4(4), 353–378.
47. Lau, R. R. (1985). Two explanations for negativity effects in political behavior. American Journal of Political Science,29(1), 119–138.
48. Levy, J. S. (2003). Applications of prospect theory to political science. Synthese,135(2), 215–241.
49. Lewis-Beck, M. S. (1988). Economics and the American voter: past, present, future. Political Behavior,10(1), 5–21.
50. Lewis-Beck, M. S., & Paldam, M. (2000). Economic voting: An introduction. Electoral Studies,19(2–3), 113–121.
51. Lewis-Beck, M. S., & Stegmaier, M. (2013). The VP-function revisited: a survey of the literature on vote and popularity functions after over 40 years. Public Choice,157(3–4), 367–385.
52. Linos, K. (2011). Diffusion through democracy. American Journal of Political Science,55(3), 678–695.
53. Louviere, J. J., Hensher, D. A., & Swait, J. D. (2000). Stated choice methods—analysis and application. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
54. Lyubomirsky, S., & Ross, L. (1997). Hedonic consequences of social comparison: a contrast of happy and unhappy people. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,73(6), 1141–1157.
55. McDermott, R. (2004). Theory in political science: Gains and losses from the first decade. Political Psychology,25(2), 289–312.
56. McDermott, R., Fowler, J. H., & Smirnov, O. (2008). On the evolutionary origin of prospect theory preferences. The Journal of Politics,70(2), 335–350.
57. McFadden, D. (1974). Conditional logit analysis of qualitative choice behavior. In P. Zarembka (Ed.), Frontiers in Econometrics (pp. 105–142). New York: Academic Press.
58. Michelitch, K., Morales, M. A., Tucker, J., & Owen, A. (2012). Looking to the future: Prospective economic voting in 2008 presidential elections. Electoral Studies,31(4), 838–851.
59. Mueller, J. E. (1973). War, presidents and public opinion. New York: Wiley.
60. Mussweiler, T., & Epstude, K. (2009). Relatively fast! Efficiency advantages of comparative thinking. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,138(1), 1–21.
61. Mussweiler, T., & Posten, A. (2011). Relatively certain! Comparative thinking reduces uncertainty. Cognition,122(2012), 236–240.
62. Mutz, D., & Mondak, J. J. (1997). Dimensions of sociotropic behavior: Group-based judgments of fairness and well-being. American Journal of Political Science,41(1), 284–308.
63. Nannestad, P., & Paldam, M. (1997). The grievance asymmetry revisited: A micro study of economic voting in Denmark, 1986–92. European Journal of Political Economy,13(1), 81–99.
64. Norpoth, H. (1996). Presidents and the prospective voter. Journal of Politics,58(3), 776–792.
65. Olsen, A. L. (2013). Compared to What? Experimental evidence on social and historical reference points in performance evaluation. Paper presented at the Midwest Political Association Meeting. Panel: Political Bias, Misinformation, and Conspiracy Theories. Chicago, USA.
66. Rozin, P., & Royzman, E. B. (2001). Negativity bias, negativity dominance, and contagion. Personality and Social Psychology Review,5(4), 296–320.
67. Ryan, M., & Gerard, K. (2003). Using discrete choice experiments to value health care programmes: Current practice and future research reflections. Applied Health Economics and Health Policy,2(1), 55–64.
68. Salmon, P. (1987). Decentralisation as an incentive scheme. Oxford Review of Economic Policy,3(2), 24–42.
69. Sanders, D. (2000). The real economy and the perceived economy in popularity functions: how much do voters need to know? A study of British data, 1974–1997. Electoral Studies,19(2), 275–294.
70. Singer, M. M., & Carlin, R. E. (2013). Context counts: The election cycle, development, and the nature of economic voting. Journal of Politics,75(3), 730–742.
71. Soroka, S. N. (2006). Good news and bad news: Asymmetric responses to economic information. The Journal of Politics,68(2), 372–385.
72. Stark, O., & Taylor, J. E. (1989). Relative deprivation and international migration. Demography,26(1), 1–14.
73. Stubager, R., Botterill, N. W., Lewis-Beck, M. S., & Nadeau, R. (2014). Scope conditions of economic voting: The Danish exception? Electoral Studies,34(1), 16–26.
74. Stubager, R., Hansen, K. M., & Goul Andersen, J. (Eds.). (2013). Krisevalg - Økonomien og folketingsvalget 2011. Copenhagen: DJØF-forlag.
75. Train, K. E. (1986). Qualitative choice analysis: Theory, econometrics, and an application to automobile. Cambridge: The MIT Press.
76. Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1991). Loss aversion in riskless choice: A reference-dependent model. The Quarterly Journal of Economics,106(4), 1039–1061.
77. van der Brug, W., van der Eijk, C., & Franklin, M. (2007). The economy and the vote: Economic conditions and elections in fifteen countries. New York: Cambridge University Press.
78. van der Eijk, C., van der Brug, W., Kroh, M., & Franklin, M. (2006). Rethinking the dependent variable in voting behavior: On the measurement and analysis of electoral utilities. Electoral Studies,25(3), 424–447.
79. Vavreck, L. (2009). The message matters—the economy and presidential campaigns. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
80. Vermeir, J., & Heyndels, B. (2006). Tax policy and yardstick voting in Flemish municipal elections. Applied Economics,38(19), 2285–2298.
81. Wittink, D. R., & Cattin, P. (1989). Commercial use of conjoint analysis: An update. Journal of Marketing,53(3), 91–96.