IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/eeupol/v14y2013i4p497-521.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Projection effects and specification bias in spatial models of European Parliament elections

Author

Listed:
  • Peter Grand
  • Guido Tiemann

Abstract

Substantial empirical evidence suggests that voters cast their ballot not only by considering the different policy positions of parties or candidates, but also appear to pull candidates/parties they prefer closer to their own ideal position (‘assimilation’) while pushing candidates/parties they dislike, farther away (‘contrast’). These effects are called ‘projection effects’. We illustrate that voters’ perceptions of policy positions of candidates/parties are contaminated by non-spatial considerations. Building on data from the EES series, we empirically demonstrate that projection effects are substantively meaningful and statistically significant in elections to the European Parliament. We moreover distinguish between unsystematic projection bias that only depends on the closeness to a specific candidate or party and systematic projection bias that is also affected by party-, voter-, and context-specific determinants.

Suggested Citation

  • Peter Grand & Guido Tiemann, 2013. "Projection effects and specification bias in spatial models of European Parliament elections," European Union Politics, , vol. 14(4), pages 497-521, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:eeupol:v:14:y:2013:i:4:p:497-521
    DOI: 10.1177/1465116513490238
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1465116513490238
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/1465116513490238?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. Macdonald, Stuart Elaine & Rabinowitz, George & Listhaug, Ola, 1995. "Political Sophistication and Models of Issue Voting," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 25(4), pages 453-483, October.
    2. Rabinowitz, George & Macdonald, Stuart Elaine, 1989. "A Directional Theory of Issue Voting," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 83(1), pages 93-121, March.
    3. Tomz, Michael & Van Houweling, Robert P., 2008. "Candidate Positioning and Voter Choice," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 102(3), pages 303-318, August.
    4. Macdonald, Stuart Elaine & Listhaug, Ola & Rabinowitz, George, 1991. "Issues and Party Support in Multiparty Systems," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 85(4), pages 1107-1131, December.
    5. Shepsle, Kenneth A., 1972. "The Strategy of Ambiguity: Uncertainty and Electoral Competition," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 66(2), pages 555-568, June.
    6. Tomz, Michael & Van Houweling, Robert P., 2009. "The Electoral Implications of Candidate Ambiguity," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 103(1), pages 83-98, February.
    7. Anthony Downs, 1957. "An Economic Theory of Political Action in a Democracy," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 65(2), pages 135-135.
    8. Macdonald, Stuart Elaine & Rabinowitz, George & Listhaug, Ola, 2007. "Simulating Models of Issue Voting," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 15(4), pages 406-427.
    9. Miller, Arthur H. & Wattenberg, Martin P. & Malanchuk, Oksana, 1986. "Schematic Assessments of Presidential Candidates," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 80(2), pages 521-540, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. N/A, 1997. "Individual Perception and Models of Issue Voting," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 9(1), pages 13-21, January.
    2. Mikael Gilljam, 1997. "Symposium. The Directional Theory of Issue Voting: I," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 9(1), pages 5-12, January.
    3. Irwin L. Morris & George Rabinowitz, 1997. "Symposium. The Directional Theory of Issue Voting: IV," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 9(1), pages 75-88, January.
    4. Andreas Hefti & Shuo Liu & Armin Schmutzler, 2022. "Preferences, Confusion and Competition," The Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 132(645), pages 1852-1881.
    5. Kenneth Benoit & Michael Laver, 2005. "Mapping the Irish Policy Space - Voter and Party Spaces in Preferential Elections," The Economic and Social Review, Economic and Social Studies, vol. 36(2), pages 83-108.
    6. Stuart Elaine Macdonald & George Rabinowitz, 1993. "Direction and Uncertainty in a Model of Issue Voting," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 5(1), pages 61-87, January.
    7. Isaac Duerr & Thomas Knight & Lindsey Woodworth, 2019. "Evidence on the Effect of Political Platform Transparency on Partisan Voting," Eastern Economic Journal, Palgrave Macmillan;Eastern Economic Association, vol. 45(3), pages 331-349, June.
    8. Samuel Merrill III & Bernard Grofman, 1997. "Symposium. The Directional Theory of Issue Voting: II," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 9(1), pages 25-48, January.
    9. Rothengatter, Marloes, 2016. "Insights in cognitive patterns : Essays on heuristics and identification," Other publications TiSEM 5f812a9d-8968-48b8-8d1b-0, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    10. Michal Tóth & Roman Chytilek, 2018. "Fast, frugal and correct? An experimental study on the influence of time scarcity and quantity of information on the voter decision making process," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 177(1), pages 67-86, October.
    11. Sivan Frenkel, 2014. "Competence and ambiguity in electoral competition," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 159(1), pages 219-234, April.
    12. Marc van de Wardt & Joost Berkhout & Floris Vermeulen, 2017. "Ecologies of ideologies: Explaining party entry and exit in West-European parliaments, 1945–2013," European Union Politics, , vol. 18(2), pages 239-259, June.
    13. Jan Rovny, 2012. "Who emphasizes and who blurs? Party strategies in multidimensional competition," European Union Politics, , vol. 13(2), pages 269-292, June.
    14. Hanne Marthe Narud, 1996. "Electoral Competition and Coalition Bargaining in Multiparty Systems," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 8(4), pages 499-525, October.
    15. Zoltán Fazekas & Levente Littvay, 2012. "Choosing sides: The genetics of why we go with the loudest," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 24(3), pages 389-408, July.
    16. Stuart Elaine Macdonald & George Rabinowitz, 1997. "On `Correcting' for Rationalization," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 9(1), pages 49-55, January.
    17. Georgia Kernell, 2016. "Strategic party heterogeneity," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 28(3), pages 408-430, July.
    18. Joseph Gershtenson, 2009. "Candidates and Competition: Variability in Ideological Voting in U.S. Senate Elections," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 90(1), pages 117-133, March.
    19. Paul V. Warwick, 2004. "Proximity, Directionality, and the Riddle of Relative Party Extremeness," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 16(3), pages 263-287, July.
    20. Burkhard Schipper & Hee Yeul Woo, 2012. "Political Awareness and Microtargeting of Voters in Electoral Competition," Working Papers 124, University of California, Davis, Department of Economics.

    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:sae:eeupol:v:14:y:2013:i:4:p:497-521. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.