IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/qualqt/v53y2019i3d10.1007_s11135-018-0819-1.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Predicting general election outcomes: campaigns and changing voter knowledge at the 2017 general election in England

Author

Listed:
  • Ron Johnston

    (University of Bristol)

  • Todd Hartman

    (University of Sheffield)

  • Charles Pattie

    (University of Sheffield)

Abstract

There is a growing literature suggesting that the result for each constituency at British general elections can be predicted using ‘citizen forecasts’ obtained through voter surveys. This may be true for the majority of constituencies where the result at previous contests was a substantial majority for one party’s candidates: few ‘safe seats’ change hands. But is it true in the marginal constituencies, where elections are won and lost? Analysis of such ‘citizen forecast’ data for the Labour-Conservative marginal constituencies in 2017 indicates not. Although respondents were aware of the seats’ relative marginality and of general trends in party support during the campaign, they could not separate out those that were eventually lost by each party from those that were won again, even in seats where the elected party won comfortably.

Suggested Citation

  • Ron Johnston & Todd Hartman & Charles Pattie, 2019. "Predicting general election outcomes: campaigns and changing voter knowledge at the 2017 general election in England," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 53(3), pages 1369-1389, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:qualqt:v:53:y:2019:i:3:d:10.1007_s11135-018-0819-1
    DOI: 10.1007/s11135-018-0819-1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11135-018-0819-1
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11135-018-0819-1?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. Leiter, Debra & Murr, Andreas & Rascón Ramírez, Ericka & Stegmaier, Mary, 2018. "Social networks and citizen election forecasting: The more friends the better," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 34(2), pages 235-248.
    2. Stiers, Dieter & Dassonneville, Ruth, 2018. "Affect versus cognition: Wishful thinking on election day," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 34(2), pages 199-215.
    3. Matthew Blackwell & James Honaker & Gary King, 2017. "A Unified Approach to Measurement Error and Missing Data: Overview and Applications," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 46(3), pages 303-341, August.
    4. Lewis-Beck, Michael S. & Skalaban, Andrew, 1989. "Citizen Forecasting: Can Voters See into the Future?," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 19(1), pages 146-153, January.
    5. Pattie, C. J. & Johnston, R. J., 2003. "Hanging on the Telephone? Doorstep and Telephone Canvassing at the British General Election of 1997," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 33(2), pages 303-322, April.
    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. Temporão, Mickael & Dufresne, Yannick & Savoie, Justin & Linden, Clifton van der, 2019. "Crowdsourcing the vote: New horizons in citizen forecasting," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 35(1), pages 1-10.
    2. Matthew Blackwell & James Honaker & Gary King, 2017. "A Unified Approach to Measurement Error and Missing Data: Overview and Applications," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 46(3), pages 303-341, August.
    3. Lewis-Beck, Michael S. & Tien, Charles, 1999. "Voters as forecasters: a micromodel of election prediction," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 15(2), pages 175-184, April.
    4. Dlugosz, Stephan & Mammen, Enno & Wilke, Ralf A., 2017. "Generalized partially linear regression with misclassified data and an application to labour market transitions," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 145-159.
    5. Sjöberg, Lennart, 2006. "Are all crowds equally wise? A comparison of political election forecasts by experts and the public," SSE/EFI Working Paper Series in Business Administration 2006:9, Stockholm School of Economics, revised 08 Sep 2008.
    6. Meyer, Bruce D. & Mittag, Nikolas, 2019. "Combining Administrative and Survey Data to Improve Income Measurement," IZA Discussion Papers 12266, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    7. Sebastian Barfort & Nikolaj Harmon & Frederik Hjorth & Asmus Leth Olsen, 2015. "Dishonesty and Selection into Public Service in Denmark: Who Runs the World’s Least Corrupt Public Sector?," Discussion Papers 15-12, University of Copenhagen. Department of Economics.
    8. Simon Grund & Oliver Lüdtke & Alexander Robitzsch, 2018. "Multiple Imputation of Missing Data at Level 2: A Comparison of Fully Conditional and Joint Modeling in Multilevel Designs," Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, , vol. 43(3), pages 316-353, June.
    9. Khan, Urmee & Lieli, Robert P., 2018. "Information flow between prediction markets, polls and media: Evidence from the 2008 presidential primaries," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 34(4), pages 696-710.
    10. Anselm Hager & Johannes Hermle & Lukas Hensel & Christopher Roth, 2020. "Does Party Competition Affect Political Activism?," CESifo Working Paper Series 8431, CESifo.
    11. Song, Shige, 2013. "Identifying the intergenerational effects of the 1959–1961 Chinese Great Leap Forward Famine on infant mortality," Economics & Human Biology, Elsevier, vol. 11(4), pages 474-487.
    12. Stiers, Dieter & Dassonneville, Ruth, 2018. "Affect versus cognition: Wishful thinking on election day," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 34(2), pages 199-215.
    13. Meffert, Michael F. & Gschwend, Thomas, 2007. "Voting for coalitions? : The role of coalition preferences and expectations in voting behavior," Papers 07-64, Sonderforschungsbreich 504.
    14. Jonathan B Slapin, 2014. "Measurement, model testing, and legislative influence in the European Union," European Union Politics, , vol. 15(1), pages 24-42, March.
    15. Rodolphe Desbordes & Gary Koop, 2014. "The known unknowns of governance," Working Papers 1407, University of Strathclyde Business School, Department of Economics.
    16. Ton de Waal & Arnout van Delden & Sander Scholtus, 2020. "Multi‐source Statistics: Basic Situations and Methods," International Statistical Review, International Statistical Institute, vol. 88(1), pages 203-228, April.
    17. Matheson, Catherine M. & Rimmer, Russell & Tinsley, Ross, 2014. "Spiritual attitudes and visitor motivations at the Beltane Fire Festival, Edinburgh," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 16-33.
    18. Joscha Legewie, 2018. "Living on the Edge: Neighborhood Boundaries and the Spatial Dynamics of Violent Crime," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 55(5), pages 1957-1977, October.
    19. Hachmi Ben Ameur & Fredj Jawadi & Abdoulkarim Idi Cheffou & Wael Louhichi, 2018. "Measurement errors in stock markets," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 262(2), pages 287-306, March.
    20. Kuwayama, Yusuke & Olmstead, Sheila & Zheng, Jiameng, 2022. "A more comprehensive estimate of the value of water quality," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 207(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:spr:qualqt:v:53:y:2019:i:3:d:10.1007_s11135-018-0819-1. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.