IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/jothpo/v9y1997i1p61-74.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Symposium. The Directional Theory of Issue Voting: III

Author

Listed:
  • Roy Pierce

Abstract

The debate over the relative merits of directional and proximity models as theories of candidate evaluation has turned largely on the criterion of predictiveness. This article adds to the predictive record for France and the United States in 1988 but also focuses on the criterion of verisimilitude. By examining the interaction between model choice and measurement technique I show that the proximity model based on idiosyncratic voter perceptions of candidate issue positions produces a more plausible representation of the distribution of issue-based candidate preferences of the voters than the directional model based on national mean perceptions of candidate issue positions.

Suggested Citation

  • Roy Pierce, 1997. "Symposium. The Directional Theory of Issue Voting: III," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 9(1), pages 61-74, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:jothpo:v:9:y:1997:i:1:p:61-74
    DOI: 10.1177/0951692897009001007
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0951692897009001007
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0951692897009001007?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, 1993. "Ideology and Candidate Evaluation," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 76(1-2), pages 59-78, June.
    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. 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.
    4. Merrill, Samuel, III, 1993. "Voting Behavior under the Directional Spatial Model of Electoral Competition," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 77(4), pages 739-756, December.
    5. Markus, Gregory B. & Converse, Philip E., 1979. "A Dynamic Simultaneous Equation Model of Electoral Choice," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 73(4), pages 1055-1070, December.
    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. 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.
    2. 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.
    3. N/A, 1997. "Individual Perception and Models of Issue Voting," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 9(1), pages 13-21, January.
    4. Stuart Elaine Macdonald & George Rabinowitz, 1997. "On `Correcting' for Rationalization," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 9(1), pages 49-55, January.
    5. 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.
    6. Mikael Gilljam, 1997. "Symposium. The Directional Theory of Issue Voting: I," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 9(1), pages 5-12, January.
    7. 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.
    8. Thomas Knight & Fan Li & Lindsey Woodworth, 2017. "It’s My Party and I’ll Vote How I Want to: Experimental Evidence of Directional Voting in Two-Candidate Elections," Eastern Economic Journal, Palgrave Macmillan;Eastern Economic Association, vol. 43(4), pages 660-676, September.
    9. Hanne Marthe Narud, 1996. "Electoral Competition and Coalition Bargaining in Multiparty Systems," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 8(4), pages 499-525, October.
    10. 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.
    11. John Maloney & Andrew Pickering, 2008. "Ideology, Competence and Luck: What determines general election results?," Bristol Economics Discussion Papers 08/607, School of Economics, University of Bristol, UK.
    12. 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.
    13. Francisco Martínez-Mora & M. Socorro Puy, 2009. "Off-the-peak preferences over government size," Working Papers 2009-9, Universidad de Málaga, Department of Economic Theory, Málaga Economic Theory Research Center.
    14. Bogomolnaia, Anna & Laslier, Jean-Francois, 2007. "Euclidean preferences," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(2), pages 87-98, February.
    15. Fabian Gouret & Guillaume Hollard & Stéphane Rossignol, 2011. "An empirical analysis of valence in electoral competition," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 37(2), pages 309-340, July.
    16. Martínez-Mora, Francisco & Puy, M. Socorro, 2014. "The determinants and electoral consequences of asymmetric preferences," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 33(C), pages 85-97.
    17. Melvin J. Hinich & Michael C. Munger, 1992. "A Spatial Theory of Ideology," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 4(1), pages 5-30, January.
    18. Robert E. Hogan, 2008. "Policy Responsiveness and Incumbent Reelection in State Legislatures," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 52(4), pages 858-873, October.
    19. 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.
    20. Eiselt, H.A. & Marianov, Vladimir, 2020. "Maximizing political vote in multiple districts," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 72(C).

    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:jothpo:v:9:y:1997:i:1:p:61-74. 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.