IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ris/qmetal/2016_003.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Dynamics of Heterogeneous Political Party Support and Egocentric Economic Evaluations: the Scottish Case

Author

Listed:
  • Chrysanthou, Georgios Marios

    (University of Alicante, D. Quantitative Methods and Economic Theory)

  • Guilló, María Dolores

    (University of Alicante, D. Quantitative Methods and Economic Theory)

Abstract

We explore the dynamics of the Scottish National Party support using longitudinal data from the BHPS during 1999-2006. Exploiting the Scottish extension sample, available since the establishment of the new Scottish Parliament in 1999, we study the relative importance of political sentiments and egocentric economic evaluations by disentangling the effects of state dependence and unobserved heterogeneity by gender. Egocentric economic evaluations are more important for the male electorate, while initial party affiliation constitutes the overriding determinant of party support among the partisan electorates regardless of gender. The electors hold the incumbent governing party accountable for their personal financial situation, but financial security and optimism augment the nationalist propensity of the partisan electorate.

Suggested Citation

  • Chrysanthou, Georgios Marios & Guilló, María Dolores, 2016. "The Dynamics of Heterogeneous Political Party Support and Egocentric Economic Evaluations: the Scottish Case," QM&ET Working Papers 16-3, University of Alicante, D. Quantitative Methods and Economic Theory.
    • Handle: RePEc:ris:qmetal:2016_003
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://web.ua.es/es/dmcte/documentos/qmetwp1603.pdf
    File Function: Full text
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Rabe-Hesketh, Sophia & Skrondal, Anders, 2013. "Avoiding biased versions of Wooldridge’s simple solution to the initial conditions problem," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 120(2), pages 346-349.
    2. Andrew J. Oswald & Nattavudh Powdthavee, 2010. "Daughters and Left-Wing Voting," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 92(2), pages 213-227, May.
    3. Verbeek, Marno & Nijman, Theo, 1992. "Testing for Selectivity Bias in Panel Data Models," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 33(3), pages 681-703, August.
    4. Jeffrey M. Wooldridge, 2005. "Simple solutions to the initial conditions problem in dynamic, nonlinear panel data models with unobserved heterogeneity," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 20(1), pages 39-54, January.
    5. Anders Skrondal & Sophia Rabe-Hesketh, 2014. "Handling initial conditions and endogenous covariates in dynamic/transition models for binary data with unobserved heterogeneity," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series C, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 63(2), pages 211-237, February.
    6. Mark B. Stewart, 2007. "The interrelated dynamics of unemployment and low-wage employment," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 22(3), pages 511-531.
    7. Paul Contoyannis & Andrew M. Jones & Nigel Rice, 2004. "The dynamics of health in the British Household Panel Survey," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 19(4), pages 473-503.
    8. Carro, Jesus M., 2007. "Estimating dynamic panel data discrete choice models with fixed effects," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 140(2), pages 503-528, October.
    9. Powdthavee, Nattavudh & Oswald, Andrew J., 2014. "Does Money Make People Right-Wing and Inegalitarian? A Longitudinal Study of Lottery Winners," Economic Research Papers 270417, University of Warwick - Department of Economics.
    10. Pedro Albarran & Raquel Carrasco & Jesus M. Carro, 2019. "Estimation of Dynamic Nonlinear Random Effects Models with Unbalanced Panels," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 81(6), pages 1424-1441, December.
    11. Jeffrey M. Wooldridge, 2005. "Simple solutions to the initial conditions problem in dynamic, nonlinear panel data models with unobserved heterogeneity," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 20(1), pages 39-54, January.
    12. Mundlak, Yair, 1978. "On the Pooling of Time Series and Cross Section Data," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 46(1), pages 69-85, January.
    13. Wiji Arulampalam & Mark B. Stewart, 2009. "Simplified Implementation of the Heckman Estimator of the Dynamic Probit Model and a Comparison with Alternative Estimators," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 71(5), pages 659-681, October.
    14. David Sanders & Malcolm Brynin, 1999. "The Dynamics of Party Preference Change in Britain, 1991–1996," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 47(2), pages 219-239, 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. Chrysanthou, Georgios Marios & Guilló, María Dolores, 2018. "The dynamics of political party support and egocentric economic evaluations: The Scottish case," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 192-213.
    2. Prieto Suarez, Joaquin, 2021. "Poverty traps and affluence shields: modelling the persistence of income position in Chile," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 110719, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    3. Georgios Marios Chrysanthou, 2021. "A Multiple Cohort Study of the Gender Gradient of Life Satisfaction during Adolescence: Longitudinal Evidence from Great Britain," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 83(6), pages 1341-1376, December.
    4. Joaquín Prieto, 2021. "Poverty traps and affluence shields: Modelling the persistence of income position in Chile," Working Papers 576, ECINEQ, Society for the Study of Economic Inequality.
    5. Lionel WILNER, 2019. "The Dynamics of Individual Happiness," Working Papers 2019-18, Center for Research in Economics and Statistics.
    6. Alexander Mosthaf & Thorsten Schank & Claus Schnabel, 2014. "Low-wage employment versus unemployment: Which one provides better prospects for women?," IZA Journal of European Labor Studies, Springer;Forschungsinstitut zur Zukunft der Arbeit GmbH (IZA), vol. 3(1), pages 1-17, December.
    7. Vesterberg, Mattias, 2018. "The effect of price on electricity contract choice," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 59-70.
    8. Lucchetti, Riccardo & Pigini, Claudia, 2017. "DPB: Dynamic Panel Binary Data Models in gretl," Journal of Statistical Software, Foundation for Open Access Statistics, vol. 79(i08).
    9. Schnitzlein, Daniel D. & Stephani, Jens, 2016. "Locus of Control and low-wage mobility," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 164-177.
    10. Pedro Albarran & Raquel Carrasco & Jesus M. Carro, 2019. "Estimation of Dynamic Nonlinear Random Effects Models with Unbalanced Panels," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 81(6), pages 1424-1441, December.
    11. Vesterberg, Mattias, 2017. "The effect of price on electricity contract choice," Umeå Economic Studies 941, Umeå University, Department of Economics.
    12. Chrysanthou, Georgios Marios & Vasilakis, Chrysovalantis, 2018. "The Dynamics and Determinants of Bullying Victimisation," IZA Discussion Papers 11902, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    13. Picchio, Matteo & van Ours, Jan C., 2013. "Retaining through training even for older workers," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 32(C), pages 29-48.
    14. Sebastian Königs, 2013. "The Dynamics of Social Assistance Benefit Receipt in Germany: State Dependence Before and After the Hartz Reforms," OECD Social, Employment and Migration Working Papers 136, OECD Publishing.
    15. Riccardo (Jack) Lucchetti & Claudia Pigini, 2020. "Choice of solutions to the initial-conditions problem in dynamic panel probit models," Working Papers 2020:27, Department of Economics, University of Venice "Ca' Foscari".
    16. Manudeep Bhuller & Christian N. Brinch & Sebastian Königs, 2017. "Time Aggregation and State Dependence in Welfare Receipt," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 127(604), pages 1833-1873, September.
    17. Cuesta, Maite Blázquez & Budría, Santiago, 2017. "Unemployment persistence: How important are non-cognitive skills?," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 29-37.
    18. Dasgupta, Kabir & Pacheco, Gail & Plum, Alexander, 2023. "State dependence in immunization and the role of discouragement," Economics & Human Biology, Elsevier, vol. 51(C).
    19. Syamsul Hidayat Pasaribu, 2016. "Persistence of Individual Unemployment in Indonesia: Dynamic Probit Analysis from Panel SUSENAS 2008-2010," International Journal of Economics and Financial Issues, Econjournals, vol. 6(3), pages 1239-1246.
    20. Bataineh, Hana & Devlin, Rose Anne & Barham, Vicky, 2019. "Social capital and having a regular family doctor: Evidence from longitudinal data," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 220(C), pages 421-429.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    egocentric economic evaluations; political preferences; unobserved heterogeneity; voting;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C23 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Single Equation Models; Single Variables - - - Models with Panel Data; Spatio-temporal Models
    • C25 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Single Equation Models; Single Variables - - - Discrete Regression and Qualitative Choice Models; Discrete Regressors; Proportions; Probabilities
    • D72 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Political Processes: Rent-seeking, Lobbying, Elections, Legislatures, and Voting Behavior

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:ris:qmetal:2016_003. 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: Julio Carmona (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/dmalies.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.