IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0201654.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The price of a vote: Diseconomy in proportional elections

Author

Listed:
  • Hygor Piaget M Melo
  • Saulo D S Reis
  • André A Moreira
  • Hernán A Makse
  • José S Andrade Jr.

Abstract

The increasing cost of electoral campaigns raises the need for effective campaign planning and a precise understanding of the return of such investment. Interestingly, despite the strong impact of elections on our daily lives, how this investment is translated into votes is still unknown. By performing data analysis and modeling, we show that top candidates spend more money per vote than the less successful and poorer candidates, a relation that discloses a diseconomy of scale. We demonstrate that such electoral diseconomy arises from the competition between candidates due to inefficient campaign expenditure. Our approach succeeds in two important tests. First, it reveals that the statistical pattern in the vote distribution of candidates can be explained in terms of the independently conceived, but similarly skewed distribution of money campaign. Second, using a heuristic argument, we are able to explain the observed turnout percentage for a given election of approximately 63% in average. This result is in good agreement with the average turnout rate obtained from real data. Due to its generality, we expect that our approach can be applied to a wide range of problems concerning the adoption process in marketing campaigns.

Suggested Citation

  • Hygor Piaget M Melo & Saulo D S Reis & André A Moreira & Hernán A Makse & José S Andrade Jr., 2018. "The price of a vote: Diseconomy in proportional elections," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(8), pages 1-13, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0201654
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0201654
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0201654
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0201654&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0201654?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. C. Borghesi & J.-P. Bouchaud, 2010. "Spatial correlations in vote statistics: a diffusive field model for decision-making," The European Physical Journal B: Condensed Matter and Complex Systems, Springer;EDP Sciences, vol. 75(3), pages 395-404, June.
    2. Christian A. Andresen & Henning F. Hansen & Alex Hansen & Giovani L. Vasconcelos & José S. Andrade, 2008. "Correlations Between Political Party Size And Voter Memory: A Statistical Analysis Of Opinion Polls," International Journal of Modern Physics C (IJMPC), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 19(11), pages 1647-1657.
    3. Angelo Mondaini Calvão & Nuno Crokidakis & Celia Anteneodo, 2015. "Stylized Facts in Brazilian Vote Distributions," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(9), pages 1-20, September.
    4. Thomas Stratmann, 2005. "Some talk: Money in politics. A (partial) review of the literature," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 124(1), pages 135-156, July.
    5. Nuno A. M. Araujo & Jose S. Andrade Jr. & Hans J. Herrmann, "undated". "Tactical voting in plurality elections," Working Papers CCSS-10-006, ETH Zurich, Chair of Systems Design.
    6. Erikson, Robert S. & Palfrey, Thomas R., 2000. "Equilibria in Campaign Spending Games: Theory and Data," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 94(3), pages 595-609, September.
    7. Alan Gerber, 2004. "Does campaign spending work?," Natural Field Experiments 00246, The Field Experiments Website.
    8. Christian Borghesi & Jean-Claude Raynal & Jean-Philippe Bouchaud, 2012. "Election Turnout Statistics in Many Countries: Similarities, Differences, and a Diffusive Field Model for Decision-Making," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 7(5), pages 1-12, May.
    9. Flaviano Morone & Hernán A. Makse, 2015. "Influence maximization in complex networks through optimal percolation," Nature, Nature, vol. 524(7563), pages 65-68, August.
    10. D. Sunshine Hillygus & Simon Jackman, 2003. "Voter Decision Making in Election 2000: Campaign Effects, Partisan Activation, and the Clinton Legacy," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 47(4), pages 583-596, October.
    11. Nuno A M Araújo & José S Andrade Jr & Hans J Herrmann, 2010. "Tactical Voting in Plurality Elections," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 5(9), pages 1-5, September.
    12. McAfee, R Preston & McMillan, John, 1995. "Organizational Diseconomies of Scale," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 4(3), pages 399-426, Fall.
    13. Jacobson, Gary C., 1978. "The Effects of Campaign Spending in Congressional Elections," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 72(2), pages 469-491, June.
    14. Costa Filho, R.N. & Almeida, M.P. & Moreira, J.E. & Andrade, J.S., 2003. "Brazilian elections: voting for a scaling democracy," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 322(C), pages 698-700.
    15. repec:bla:jemstr:v:4:y:1995:i:3:p:399-426:a is not listed on IDEAS
    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. Hoferer, Moritz & Böttcher, Lucas & Herrmann, Hans J. & Gersbach, Hans, 2020. "The impact of technologies in political campaigns," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 538(C).
    2. Cardoso, M. & Souza, J.T.G. & Neli, R.R. & Souza, W.E., 2023. "Scaling laws from Brazilian state election results point out that, the candidate’s chance to win increases by investing more campaign efforts in smaller electorates," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 619(C).
    3. Cardoso, M. & Silva, L.M.C. & Neli, R.R. & Souza, W.E., 2022. "Electorate involvement disorder: Universal relationship between the amplitude and electorate size in second round of Brazilian Presidential Election," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 591(C).
    4. John Bryden & Eric Silverman, 2019. "Underlying socio-political processes behind the 2016 US election," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(4), pages 1-11, April.
    5. Hygor P M Melo & Nuno A M Araújo & José S Andrade Jr., 2019. "Fundraising and vote distribution: A non-equilibrium statistical approach," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(10), pages 1-9, October.
    6. Cardoso, M. & Afonso, L.H.D. & Neli, R.R. & Souza, W.E., 2024. "Simplified model relating blank and null votes to voter turnout from Brazilian state elections results," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 645(C).
    7. Cardoso, M. & Mendes, R.S. & Souza, J.T.G. & Ribeiro, H.V., 2020. "Gender difference in candidature processes for Brazilian elections," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 537(C).

    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. Hygor P M Melo & Nuno A M Araújo & José S Andrade Jr., 2019. "Fundraising and vote distribution: A non-equilibrium statistical approach," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(10), pages 1-9, October.
    2. Braha, Dan & de Aguiar, Marcus A. M., 2018. "Voting contagion: Modeling and analysis of a century of U.S. presidential elections," SocArXiv mzxnr, Center for Open Science.
    3. Julia Cage & Edgard Dewitte, 2021. "It Takes Money to Make MPs: Evidence from 150 Years of British Campaign Spending," SciencePo Working papers Main hal-03384143, HAL.
    4. Julia Cage & Edgard Dewitte, 2021. "It Takes Money to Make MPs: Evidence from 150 Years of British Campaign Spending," SciencePo Working papers hal-03384143, HAL.
    5. repec:hal:spmain:info:hdl:2441/1dp7827s4n8ht8fk3qhmeuvd0o is not listed on IDEAS
    6. repec:spo:wpmain:info:hdl:2441/1dp7827s4n8ht8fk3qhmeuvd0o is not listed on IDEAS
    7. Cardoso, M. & Mendes, R.S. & Souza, J.T.G. & Ribeiro, H.V., 2020. "Gender difference in candidature processes for Brazilian elections," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 537(C).
    8. repec:spo:wpecon:info:hdl:2441/1dp7827s4n8ht8fk3qhmeuvd0o is not listed on IDEAS
    9. repec:hal:wpspec:info:hdl:2441/1dp7827s4n8ht8fk3qhmeuvd0o is not listed on IDEAS
    10. Bekkouche, Yasmine & Cagé, Julia & Dewitte, Edgard, 2022. "The heterogeneous price of a vote: Evidence from multiparty systems, 1993–2017," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 206(C).
    11. Kenneth Benoit & Michael Marsh, 2008. "The Campaign Value of Incumbency: A New Solution to the Puzzle of Less Effective Incumbent Spending," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 52(4), pages 874-890, October.
    12. Rogers, Todd T & Middleton, Joel A., 2012. "Are Ballot Initiative Outcomes Influenced by the Campaigns of Independent Groups? A Precinct-Randomized Field Experiment," Scholarly Articles 9830357, Harvard Kennedy School of Government.
    13. Cardoso, M. & Silva, L.M.C. & Neli, R.R. & Souza, W.E., 2022. "Electorate involvement disorder: Universal relationship between the amplitude and electorate size in second round of Brazilian Presidential Election," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 591(C).
    14. Volker Hösel & Johannes Müller & Aurelien Tellier, 2019. "Universality of neutral models: decision process in politics," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 5(1), pages 1-8, December.
    15. Jeffrey Milyo, 2013. "Campaign Spending and Electoral Competition: Towards More Policy Relevant Research," Working Papers 1311, Department of Economics, University of Missouri.
    16. Yangguang Huang & Ming He, 2021. "Structural Analysis Of Tullock Contests With An Application To U.S. House Of Representatives Elections," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 62(3), pages 1011-1054, August.
    17. Hoyong Jung, 2022. "Examining the relationship between political spending and legislative activities," Bulletin of Economic Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 74(2), pages 539-568, April.
    18. Aleksejus Kononovicius, 2017. "Empirical Analysis and Agent-Based Modeling of the Lithuanian Parliamentary Elections," Complexity, Hindawi, vol. 2017, pages 1-15, November.
    19. Anghel Negriu & Cyrille Piatecki, 2012. "On the performance of voting systems in spatial voting simulations," Journal of Economic Interaction and Coordination, Springer;Society for Economic Science with Heterogeneous Interacting Agents, vol. 7(1), pages 63-77, May.
    20. Bruno Carvalho, 2021. "Campaign Spending in Local Elections: the Effects of Public Funding," Working Papers ECARES 2021-30, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    21. Anne E. Baker, 2021. "Loan Financing as a Tool for Nonincumbent House Candidates," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 102(4), pages 1466-1483, July.
    22. Fink, Alexander, 2012. "The effects of party campaign spending under proportional representation: Evidence from Germany," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 28(4), pages 574-592.
    23. Abel François & Michael Visser & Lionel Wilner, 2022. "The petit effect of campaign spending on votes: using political financing reforms to measure spending impacts in multiparty elections," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 192(1), pages 29-57, July.
    24. H Hernández-Saldaña, 2013. "Results on Three Predictions for July 2012 Federal Elections in Mexico Based on Past Regularities," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(12), pages 1-8, December.

    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:plo:pone00:0201654. 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: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    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.