IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/snbeco/v4y2024i11d10.1007_s43546-024-00697-4.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Electing in the dark? Voting behavior in light of polarization

Author

Listed:
  • Marius D. May

    (University of Siegen)

Abstract

This paper develops a behavioral public choice model. It provides testable hypothesis to explain voter shifts in European national elections in the last decade. The model comprises three blocs of parties, the government, the opposition and so-called “profiteers”. Retrospective voters evaluate the performance of each bloc. Furthermore, it introduces an exogenous polarizing event that can affect the government’s and the profiteers’ chance to satisfy voters. Moreover, voters are subject to the negativity bias, which means that negative changes in probabilities to satisfy are stronger than positive changes. This framework yields various results on voting behavior under polarization. Most are robust to the introduction of non-voting. The government only profits from polarization iff sufficiently many positively voters are polarized in their favor to outweigh both the negativity bias and the increased competitiveness by profiteers due to polarization. Profiteers, strengthened by polarization, harm the opposition and increase voter turnout. Additionally, a higher negativity bias impairs the government, decreases voter turnout and benefits the opposition and profiteers.

Suggested Citation

  • Marius D. May, 2024. "Electing in the dark? Voting behavior in light of polarization," SN Business & Economics, Springer, vol. 4(11), pages 1-29, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:snbeco:v:4:y:2024:i:11:d:10.1007_s43546-024-00697-4
    DOI: 10.1007/s43546-024-00697-4
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s43546-024-00697-4
    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/s43546-024-00697-4?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. Ager, Philipp & Brückner, Markus, 2013. "Cultural diversity and economic growth: Evidence from the US during the age of mass migration," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 76-97.
    2. Jonathan Bendor & Sunil Kumar & David A. Siegel, 2010. "Adaptively Rational Retrospective Voting," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 22(1), pages 26-63, January.
    3. Lluis Orriols & Guillermo Cordero, 2016. "The Breakdown of the Spanish Two-Party System: The Upsurge of Podemos and Ciudadanos in the 2015 General Election," South European Society and Politics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(4), pages 469-492, October.
    4. Ben Lockwood & James Rockey, 2020. "Negative Voters? Electoral Competition with Loss-Aversion," The Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 130(632), pages 2619-2648.
    5. Fair, Ray C, 1978. "The Effect of Economic Events on Votes for President," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 60(2), pages 159-173, May.
    6. Liberini, Federica & Redoano, Michela & Russo, Antonio & Cuevas, Angel & Cuevas, Ruben, 2018. "Politics in the Facebook Era Evidence from the 2016 US Presidential Elections," The Warwick Economics Research Paper Series (TWERPS) 1181, University of Warwick, Department of Economics.
    7. Ivo Bischoff & Lars-H. Siemers, 2013. "Biased beliefs and retrospective voting: why democracies choose mediocre policies," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 156(1), pages 163-180, July.
    8. Mohammed Abdellaoui & Han Bleichrodt & Olivier L’Haridon, 2008. "A tractable method to measure utility and loss aversion under prospect theory," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 36(3), pages 245-266, June.
    9. Aisen, Ari & Veiga, Francisco José, 2013. "How does political instability affect economic growth?," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 29(C), pages 151-167.
    10. Joan Esteban & Debraj Ray, 2011. "Linking Conflict to Inequality and Polarization," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 101(4), pages 1345-1374, June.
    11. Anna Bosco & Susannah Verney, 2016. "From Electoral Epidemic to Government Epidemic: The Next Level of the Crisis in Southern Europe," South European Society and Politics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(4), pages 383-406, October.
    12. Zahid Pervaiz & Amatul R. Chaudhary, 2015. "Social Cohesion and Economic Growth: An Empirical Investigation," Australian Economic Review, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, vol. 48(4), pages 369-381, December.
    13. Andrew M. Guess & Brendan Nyhan & Jason Reifler, 2020. "Exposure to untrustworthy websites in the 2016 US election," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 4(5), pages 472-480, May.
    14. repec:cup:apsrev:v:65:y:1971:i:1:p:131-143_1 is not listed on IDEAS
    15. Hunt Allcott & Matthew Gentzkow, 2017. "Social Media and Fake News in the 2016 Election," NBER Working Papers 23089, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    16. Arthur T. Denzau & Douglass C. North, 1994. "Shared Mental Models: Ideologies and Institutions," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 47(1), pages 3-31, February.
    17. Han Bleichrodt & Jose Luis Pinto & Peter P. Wakker, 2001. "Making Descriptive Use of Prospect Theory to Improve the Prescriptive Use of Expected Utility," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 47(11), pages 1498-1514, November.
    18. Allan M. Wilford, 2017. "Polarization, Number of Parties, and Voter Turnout: Explaining Turnout in 26 OECD Countries," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 98(5), pages 1391-1405, November.
    19. Huber, Gregory A. & Hill, Seth J. & Lenz, Gabriel S., 2012. "Sources of Bias in Retrospective Decision Making: Experimental Evidence on Voters’ Limitations in Controlling Incumbents," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 106(4), pages 720-741, November.
    20. Hunt Allcott & Matthew Gentzkow, 2017. "Social Media and Fake News in the 2016 Election," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 31(2), pages 211-236, Spring.
    21. Abu-Bader, Suleiman & Ianchovichina, Elena, 2019. "Polarization, foreign military intervention, and civil conflict," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 141(C).
    22. Ignacio Esponda & Demian Pouzo, 2017. "Conditional Retrospective Voting in Large Elections," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 9(2), pages 54-75, May.
    23. Debus, Marc & Stegmaier, Mary & Tosun, Jale, 2014. "Economic Voting under Coalition Governments: Evidence from Germany," Political Science Research and Methods, Cambridge University Press, vol. 2(1), pages 49-67, April.
    24. Bartczak, Anna & Chilton, Susan & Czajkowski, Mikołaj & Meyerhoff, Jürgen, 2017. "Gain and loss of money in a choice experiment. The impact of financial loss aversion and risk preferences on willingness to pay to avoid renewable energy externalities," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 326-334.
    25. William D. Nordhaus, 1975. "The Political Business Cycle," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 42(2), pages 169-190.
    26. Ignacio Esponda & Demian Pouzo, 2019. "Retrospective Voting And Party Polarization," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 60(1), pages 157-186, February.
    27. Salamon, Lester M. & Van Evera, Stephen, 1973. "Fear, Apathy, and Discrimination: A Test of Three Explanations of Political Participation," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 67(4), pages 1288-1306, December.
    28. Kramer, Gerald H., 1971. "Short-Term Fluctuations in U.S. Voting Behavior, 1896–1964," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 65(1), pages 131-143, March.
    29. Ashworth, Scott & Bueno De Mesquita, Ethan, 2014. "Is Voter Competence Good for Voters?: Information, Rationality, and Democratic Performance," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 108(3), pages 565-587, August.
    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. Schnellenbach, Jan & Schubert, Christian, 2015. "Behavioral political economy: A survey," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 40(PB), pages 395-417.
    2. Jeroen Klomp, 2020. "Election or Disaster Support?," Journal of Development Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 56(1), pages 205-220, January.
    3. Nyabuti Damaris Kemunto & Prof. Hezron Mogambi & Dr. Anita Kiamba, 2023. "Foreign Policy Disinformation: Fueling Polarization and Deterioration of the Public Sphere in Kenya," International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science, International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science (IJRISS), vol. 7(8), pages 425-442, August.
    4. Fabio Milani, 2010. "Political Business Cycles In The New Keynesian Model," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 48(4), pages 896-915, October.
    5. David Mitchell, 2023. "Covid-19 and the 2020 presidential election," Constitutional Political Economy, Springer, vol. 34(2), pages 188-209, June.
    6. Liberini, Federica & Redoano, Michela & Proto, Eugenio, 2017. "Happy voters," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 41-57.
    7. Saumya Bhadani & Shun Yamaya & Alessandro Flammini & Filippo Menczer & Giovanni Luca Ciampaglia & Brendan Nyhan, 2022. "Political audience diversity and news reliability in algorithmic ranking," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 6(4), pages 495-505, April.
    8. Bucciol, Alessandro, 2018. "False claims in politics: Evidence from the US," Research in Economics, Elsevier, vol. 72(2), pages 196-210.
    9. Sergei Guriev & Elias Papaioannou, 2022. "The Political Economy of Populism," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 60(3), pages 753-832, September.
    10. Gourley, Patrick & Khamis, Melanie, 2023. "It is not easy being a Green party: Green politics as a normal good," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 76(C).
    11. Robert Michaels, 1986. "Reinterpreting the role of inflation in politico-economic models," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 48(2), pages 113-124, January.
    12. Li, Anqi & Hu, Lin, 2023. "Electoral accountability and selection with personalized information aggregation," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 296-315.
    13. João Pedro Baptista & Anabela Gradim, 2020. "Understanding Fake News Consumption: A Review," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 9(10), pages 1-22, October.
    14. Ulrich Lächler, 1984. "The political business cycle under rational voting behavior," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 44(3), pages 411-430, January.
    15. Henry Chappell & William Keech, 1985. "The political viability of rule-based monetary policy," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 46(2), pages 125-140, January.
    16. Cantarella, Michele & Fraccaroli, Nicolò & Volpe, Roberto, 2023. "Does fake news affect voting behaviour?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(1).
    17. Sarah Spiekermann & Hanna Krasnova & Oliver Hinz & Annika Baumann & Alexander Benlian & Henner Gimpel & Irina Heimbach & Antonia Köster & Alexander Maedche & Björn Niehaves & Marten Risius & Manuel Tr, 2022. "Values and Ethics in Information Systems," Business & Information Systems Engineering: The International Journal of WIRTSCHAFTSINFORMATIK, Springer;Gesellschaft für Informatik e.V. (GI), vol. 64(2), pages 247-264, April.
    18. S. Brock Blomberg, 1996. "A Model Of Voter Choice In A Life‐Cycle Setting," Economics and Politics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 8(3), pages 213-229, November.
    19. Bruno Carvalho & Claudia Custodio & Benny Geys & Diogo Mendes & Susana Peralta, 2020. "Information, Perceptions, and Electoral Behaviour of Young Voters: A Randomised Controlled Experiment," Working Papers ECARES 2020-14, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    20. Christopher Adamo & Jeffrey Carpenter, 2023. "Sentiment and the belief in fake news during the 2020 presidential primaries," Oxford Open Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 2, pages 512-547.

    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:snbeco:v:4:y:2024:i:11:d:10.1007_s43546-024-00697-4. 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.