IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/apsrev/v83y1989i01p143-163_08.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Nature of Utility Functions in Mass Publics

Author

Listed:
  • Brady, Henry E.
  • Ansolabehere, Stephen

Abstract

Survey data are used to test the basic tenets of rational choice theory. We find that (1) voters' preferences are orderly but voters do not always have preferences. When the perceived difference between two candidates is below some threshold, voters are indifferent between them. (2) Most voters choose candidates whose issue positions are congruent with their own. (3) Lack of knowledge about candidates affects choice and utility through two routes—indifference and risk aversion.Most voters have highly structured utility functions, but the thresholds and risk aversion in these functions place relatively unknown candidates at a disadvantage in presidential primaries and other electoral situations. Moreover, the importance of knowledge in these functions suggests that social choice theorists must take seriously the classic concerns of public opinion research—the operation of the media and the dynamics of information in elections.

Suggested Citation

  • Brady, Henry E. & Ansolabehere, Stephen, 1989. "The Nature of Utility Functions in Mass Publics," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 83(1), pages 143-163, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:apsrev:v:83:y:1989:i:01:p:143-163_08
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0003055400082290/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Christopher Hare & Tzu-Ping Liu & Robert N. Lupton, 2018. "What Ordered Optimal Classification reveals about ideological structure, cleavages, and polarization in the American mass public," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 176(1), pages 57-78, July.
    2. Regenwetter, Michel & Marley, A. A. J. & Grofman, Bernard, 2002. "A general concept of majority rule," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 43(3), pages 405-428, July.
    3. James F. Adams & Ernest W. Adams, 2000. "The Geometry of Voting Cycles," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 12(2), pages 131-153, April.
    4. Freeman, John R., 1996. "A Computable Equilibrium Model for the Study of Political Economy," Bulletins 7484, University of Minnesota, Economic Development Center.
    5. Tapki, Ipek Gursel, 2007. "Revealed incomplete preferences under status-quo bias," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 53(3), pages 274-283, May.
    6. Selb, Peter & Herrmann, Michael & Munzert, Simon & Schübel, Thomas & Shikano, Susumu, 2013. "Forecasting runoff elections using candidate evaluations from first round exit polls," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 29(4), pages 541-547.
    7. Sivan Frenkel, 2014. "Competence and ambiguity in electoral competition," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 159(1), pages 219-234, April.
    8. Robert Smith, 1992. "Action embedded in social structure: A systematic theory Part I, theory and evidence," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 26(2), pages 181-204, May.
    9. Harold D. Clarke & Euel Elliott & Barry J. Seldon, 1994. "A Utility Function Analysis of Competing Models of Party Support," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 6(3), pages 289-305, July.
    10. Michel Regenwetter & James Adams & Bernard Grofman, 2002. "On the (Sample) Condorcet Efficiency of Majority Rule: An alternative view of majority cycles and social homogeneity," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 53(2), pages 153-186, September.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:apsrev:v:83:y:1989:i:01:p:143-163_08. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/psr .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.