IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/pra/mprapa/80833.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Comparing votes and seats with a diagonal (dis-) proportionality measure, using the slope-diagonal deviation (SDD) with cosine, sine and sign

Author

Listed:
  • Colignatus, Thomas

Abstract

When v is a vector of votes for parties and s is a vector of their seats gained in the House of Commons or the House of Representatives - with a single zero for the lumped category of "Other", of the wasted vote for parties that got votes but no seats - and when V = 1'v is total turnout and S = 1's the total number of seats, and w = v / V and z = s / S, then k = Cos[w, z] is a symmetric measure of similarity of the two vectors, θ = ArcCos[k] is the angle between the two vectors, and Sin[θ] is a measure of disproportionality along the diagonal. The geometry that uses Sin appears to be less sensitive than voters, representatives and researchers are to disproportionalities. This likely relates to the Weber-Fechner law. A disproportionality measure with improved sensitivity for human judgement is 10 √Sin[θ]. This puts an emphasis on the first digits of a scale of 10, which can be seen as an inverse (Bart Simpson) report card. The suggested measure has a sound basis in the theory of voting and statistics. The measure of 10 √Sin[θ] satisfies the properties of a metric and may be called the slope-diagonal deviation (SDD) metric. The cosine is the geometric mean of the slopes of the regressions through the origin of z given w and w given z. The sine uses the deviation of this mean from the diagonal. The paper provides (i) theoretical foundations, (ii) evaluation of the relevant literature in voting theory and statistics, (iii) example outcomes of both theoretical cases and the 2017 elections in Holland, France and the UK, and (iv) comparison to other disproportionality measures and scores on criteria. Using criteria that are accepted in the voting literature, SDD appears to be better than currently available measures. It is rather amazing that the measure has not been developed a long time ago and been used for long. My search in the textbooks and literature has its limits however. A confusing element is that voting theorists speak about "proportionality" only for the diagonal while in mathematics and statistics any line through the origin is proportional.

Suggested Citation

  • Colignatus, Thomas, 2017. "Comparing votes and seats with a diagonal (dis-) proportionality measure, using the slope-diagonal deviation (SDD) with cosine, sine and sign," MPRA Paper 80833, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 17 Aug 2017.
    • Handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:80833
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/80833/1/MPRA_paper_80833.pdf
    File Function: original version
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/80965/1/MPRA_paper_80965.pdf
    File Function: revised version
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/81389/1/MPRA_paper_81389.pdf
    File Function: revised version
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/84469/1/MPRA_paper_84469.pdf
    File Function: revised version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Colignatus, Thomas, 2010. "Single vote multiple seats elections. Didactics of district versus proportional representation, using the examples of the United Kingdom and The Netherlands," MPRA Paper 22671, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 06 Jul 2007.
    2. Colignatus, Thomas, 2009. "Elegance with substance," MPRA Paper 15173, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. Colignatus, Thomas, 2017. "The performance of four possible rules for selecting the Prime Minister after the Dutch Parliamentary elections of March 2017," MPRA Paper 77616, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 17 Mar 2017.
    4. Draper, Norman R. & Yang, Yonghong (Fred), 1997. "Generalization of the geometric mean functional relationship," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 23(3), pages 355-372, January.
    5. Colignatus, Thomas, 2007. "Correlation and regression in contingency tables. A measure of association or correlation in nominal data (contingency tables), using determinants," MPRA Paper 3394, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 07 Jun 2007.
    6. Colignatus, Thomas, 2017. "Two conditions for the application of Lorenz curve and Gini coefficient to voting and allocated seats," MPRA Paper 80297, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 21 Jul 2017.
    7. Moshe Koppel & Abraham Diskin, 2009. "Measuring disproportionality, volatility and malapportionment: axiomatization and solutions," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 33(2), pages 281-286, August.
    8. David Lovell & Vera Pawlowsky-Glahn & Juan José Egozcue & Samuel Marguerat & Jürg Bähler, 2015. "Proportionality: A Valid Alternative to Correlation for Relative Data," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(3), pages 1-12, March.
    9. Tofallis, C., 2000. "Multiple Neutral Regression," Papers 2000:13, University of Hertfordshire - Business Schoool.
    10. Colignatus, Thomas, 2007. "A measure of association (correlation) in nominal data (contingency tables), using determinants," MPRA Paper 2662, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 10 Apr 2007.
    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. Colignatus, Thomas, 2017. "Comparing votes and seats with a diagonal (dis-) proportionality measure, using the slope-diagonal deviation (SDD) with cosine, sine and sign," MPRA Paper 80965, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 24 Aug 2017.
    2. Colignatus, Thomas, 2018. "An overview of the elementary statistics of correlation, R-squared, cosine, sine, and regression through the origin, with application to votes and seats for Parliament," MPRA Paper 84722, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 20 Feb 2018.
    3. Colignatus, Thomas, 2017. "One woman, one vote. Though not in the USA, UK and France," MPRA Paper 82513, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 08 Nov 2017.
    4. Colignatus, Thomas, 2017. "Two conditions for the application of Lorenz curve and Gini coefficient to voting and allocated seats," MPRA Paper 80297, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 21 Jul 2017.
    5. Colignatus, Thomas, 2007. "The 2 x 2 x 2 case in causality, of an effect, a cause and a confounder. A cross-over’s guide to the 2 x 2 x 2 contingency table," MPRA Paper 3351, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 14 May 2007.
    6. de Mouzon, Olivier & Laurent, Thibault & Le Breton, Michel, 2020. "One Man, One Vote Part 2: Measurement of Malapportionment and Disproportionality and the Lorenz Curve," TSE Working Papers 20-1089, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE).
    7. Shaoji Xu, 2014. "A Property of Geometric Mean Regression," The American Statistician, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 68(4), pages 277-281, November.
    8. Colignatus, Thomas, 2013. "The performance of four possible rules for selecting the Prime Minister after the Dutch Parliamentary elections of September 2012," MPRA Paper 44158, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 02 Feb 2013.
    9. Miguel Martínez-Panero & Verónica Arredondo & Teresa Peña & Victoriano Ramírez, 2019. "A New Quota Approach to Electoral Disproportionality," Economies, MDPI, vol. 7(1), pages 1-17, March.
    10. Huang Lin & Merete Eggesbø & Shyamal Das Peddada, 2022. "Linear and nonlinear correlation estimators unveil undescribed taxa interactions in microbiome data," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 13(1), pages 1-16, December.
    11. Sarkar, Sandip & Dash, Bharatee Bhusana, 2023. "On the measurement of electoral volatility," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 119-128.
    12. D. Bouyssou & T. Marchant & M. Pirlot, 2020. "A characterization of two disproportionality and malapportionment indices: the Duncan and Duncan index and the Lijphart index," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 284(1), pages 147-163, January.
    13. Aaron Brick & Cameron Brick, 2021. "Districting that minimizes partisan bias," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 8(1), pages 1-6, December.
    14. Matakos, Konstantinos & Savolainen, Riikka & Troumpounis, Orestis & Tukiainen, Janne & Xefteris, Dimitrios, 2018. "Electoral Institutions and Intraparty Cohesion," Working Papers 109, VATT Institute for Economic Research.
    15. Chris Tofallis, 2023. "Fitting an Equation to Data Impartially," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 11(18), pages 1-14, September.
    16. Colignatus, Thomas, 2010. "The performance of four possible rules for selecting the Prime Minister after the Dutch Parliamentary elections of June 2010," MPRA Paper 23240, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 19 May 2010.
    17. Mark H Holmes & Michael Caiola, 2018. "Invariance properties for the error function used for multilinear regression," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(12), pages 1-25, December.
    18. Junichiro Wada, 2010. "Evaluating the Unfairness of Representation With the Nash Social Welfare Function," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 22(4), pages 445-467, October.
    19. Rafael Hortala-Vallve & Jaakko Meriläinen & Janne Tukiainen, 2024. "Pre-electoral coalitions and the distribution of political power," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 198(1), pages 47-67, January.
    20. James Laird-Smith & Kevin Meyer & Kanshukan Rajaratnam, 2016. "A study of total beta specification through symmetric regression: the case of the Johannesburg Stock Exchange," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 36(2), pages 114-125, June.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    General Economics; Social Choice; Social Welfare; Election; Majority Rule; Parliament; Party System; Representation; Proportion; District; Voting; Seat; Metric; Euclid; Distance; Cosine; Sine; Gallagher; Loosemore-Hanby; Sainte-Laguë; Largest Remainder; Webster; Jefferson; Hamilton; Slope Diagonal Deviation; Correlation; Diagonal regression; Regression through the origin; Apportionment; Disproportionality; Equity; Inequality; Lorenz; Gini coefficient;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • A10 - General Economics and Teaching - - General Economics - - - General
    • D63 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - Equity, Justice, Inequality, and Other Normative Criteria and Measurement
    • D71 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Social Choice; Clubs; Committees; Associations
    • D72 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Political Processes: Rent-seeking, Lobbying, Elections, Legislatures, and Voting Behavior

    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:pra:mprapa:80833. 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: Joachim Winter (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/vfmunde.html .

    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.