IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/intfor/v29y2013i4p541-547.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Forecasting runoff elections using candidate evaluations from first round exit polls

Author

Listed:
  • Selb, Peter
  • Herrmann, Michael
  • Munzert, Simon
  • Schübel, Thomas
  • Shikano, Susumu

Abstract

We draw attention to a simple yet underappreciated way of forecasting the outcomes of elections involving two rounds of voting: surveying the voters’ candidate evaluations in first round exit polls, poststratifying the sample proportions of reported votes to official first round election returns, and redistributing the votes for eliminated competitors according to their supporters’ lower-order preferences among the viable alternatives in round two. We argue that the approach is likely to outperform standard pre-election surveys, due to its better coverage and reduced measurement error, and the possibility of correcting for sample selection. We set out the practical details of the method and demonstrate its usefulness by employing a recent German mayoral election as an empirical case. Thirteen candidates were competing in the first round, while there were six candidates in the decisive second round. The runoff result was forecast two weeks in advance with an average absolute error of less than one percentage point.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:intfor:v:29:y:2013:i:4:p:541-547
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ijforecast.2013.02.001
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0169207013000344
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ijforecast.2013.02.001?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. repec:reg:rpubli:259 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Weisberg, Herbert F. & Rusk, Jerrold G., 1970. "Dimensions of Candidate Evaluation," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 64(4), pages 1167-1185, December.
    3. 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.
    4. Justin Wolfers & Eric Zitzewitz, 2004. "Prediction Markets," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 18(2), pages 107-126, Spring.
    5. Sakurai, Sergio N. & Menezes, Naercio A., 2008. "Fiscal policy and reelection in Brazilian municipalities," Insper Working Papers wpe_117, Insper Working Paper, Insper Instituto de Ensino e Pesquisa.
    6. Plutzer, Eric, 2002. "Becoming a Habitual Voter: Inertia, Resources, and Growth in Young Adulthood," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 96(1), pages 41-56, March.
    7. Jerome, Bruno & Jerome, Veronique & Lewis-Beck, Michael S., 1999. "Polls fail in France: forecasts of the 1997 legislative election1," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 15(2), pages 163-174, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Antoinette Baujard & Isabelle Lebon, 2022. "Not-so-strategic Voters," Working Papers 2201, Groupe d'Analyse et de Théorie Economique Lyon St-Étienne (GATE Lyon St-Étienne), Université de Lyon.
    2. Antoinette Baujard & Isabelle Lebon, 2022. "Not-so-strategic voters. Evidence from an in situ experiment during the 2017 French presidential election [Wp Gate 2022-2201]," Working Papers halshs-03607809, HAL.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    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. Lehmann, M. Christian & Matarazzo, Hellen, 2019. "Voters’ response to in-kind transfers: Quasi-experimental evidence from prescription drug cost-sharing in Brazil," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 184(C).
    3. Meirowitz, Adam, 2005. "Deliberative Democracy or Market Democracy: Designing Institutions to Aggregate Preferences and Information," Papers 03-28-2005, Princeton University, Research Program in Political Economy.
    4. Byung-Yeon Kim & Gerard Roland, 2011. "Are the Markets Afraid of Kim Jong-Il?," KIER Working Papers 789, Kyoto University, Institute of Economic Research.
    5. Dindo, Pietro & Massari, Filippo, 2020. "The wisdom of the crowd in dynamic economies," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 15(4), November.
    6. Christopher N. Avery & Judith A. Chevalier & Richard J. Zeckhauser, 2016. "The "CAPS" Prediction System and Stock Market Returns," Review of Finance, European Finance Association, vol. 20(4), pages 1363-1381.
    7. Rodrigo Martins & Francisco Veiga, 2013. "Economic voting in Portuguese municipal elections," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 155(3), pages 317-334, June.
    8. Siemroth, Christoph, 2014. "Why prediction markets work : The role of information acquisition and endogenous weighting," Working Papers 14-02, University of Mannheim, Department of Economics.
    9. Coleman, S., 2010. "Russian Election Reform and the Effect of Social Conformity on Voting and the Party System: 2007 and 2008," Journal of the New Economic Association, New Economic Association, issue 5, pages 73-90.
    10. Justin Wolfers & Eric Zitzewitz, 2006. "Interpreting prediction market prices as probabilities," Working Paper Series 2006-11, Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco.
    11. Arzheimer, Kai & Evans, Jocelyn, 2010. "Bread and butter à la française: Multiparty forecasts of the French legislative vote (1981-2007)," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 26(1), pages 19-31, January.
    12. Kitsul, Yuriy & Wright, Jonathan H., 2013. "The economics of options-implied inflation probability density functions," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 110(3), pages 696-711.
    13. McKenzie, Jordi, 2013. "Predicting box office with and without markets: Do internet users know anything?," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 25(2), pages 70-80.
    14. Michael Haman, 2021. "Recall Elections: A Tool of Accountability? Evidence from Peru," Revista Desarrollo y Sociedad, Universidad de los Andes,Facultad de Economía, CEDE, vol. 87(3), March.
    15. Andr� Betzer & Markus Doumet & Ulf Rinne, 2013. "How policy changes affect shareholder wealth: the case of the Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear disaster," Applied Economics Letters, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(8), pages 799-803, May.
    16. Albert N. Link & John T. Scott, 2013. "Private Investor Participation and Commercialization Rates for Government-sponsored Research and Development: Would a Prediction Market Improve the Performance of the SBIR Programme?," Chapters, in: Public Support of Innovation in Entrepreneurial Firms, chapter 11, pages 157-174, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    17. Lawrence Choo & Todd R. Kaplan & Ro’i Zultan, 2019. "Information aggregation in Arrow–Debreu markets: an experiment," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 22(3), pages 625-652, September.
    18. Shawn Cole & Xavier Gine & Jeremy Tobacman & Petia Topalova & Robert Townsend & James Vickery, 2013. "Barriers to Household Risk Management: Evidence from India," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 5(1), pages 104-135, January.
    19. Atanasov, Pavel & Witkowski, Jens & Ungar, Lyle & Mellers, Barbara & Tetlock, Philip, 2020. "Small steps to accuracy: Incremental belief updaters are better forecasters," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 160(C), pages 19-35.
    20. Spyros Galanis & Christos A Ioannou & Stelios Kotronis, 2024. "Information Aggregation Under Ambiguity: Theory and Experimental Evidence," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 91(6), pages 3423-3467.

    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:eee:intfor:v:29:y:2013:i:4:p:541-547. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/ijforecast .

    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.