IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/r/cup/apsrev/v103y2009i04p570-587_99.html
   My bibliography  Save this item

The Case for Responsible Parties

Citations

Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
as


Cited by:

  1. Shino Takayama & Yuki Tamura, 2015. "A Nash Equilibrium in Electoral Competition Models," Discussion Papers Series 546, School of Economics, University of Queensland, Australia.
  2. repec:lan:wpaper:1815 is not listed on IDEAS
  3. Levy, Gilat & Razin, Ronny, 2015. "Does Polarisation of Opinions Lead to Polarisation of Platforms? The Case of Correlation Neglect," Quarterly Journal of Political Science, now publishers, vol. 10(3), pages 321-355, September.
  4. Gersbach, Hans & Tejada, Oriol & Muller, Philippe, 2016. "The Effects of Higher Re-election Hurdles and Costs of Policy Change on Political Polarization," CEPR Discussion Papers 11375, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
  5. Dimitrios Xefteris & Galina Zudenkova, 2018. "Electoral competition under costly policy implementation," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 50(4), pages 721-739, April.
  6. Bracco, Emanuele, 2013. "Optimal districting with endogenous party platforms," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 1-13.
  7. Dan Usher, 2011. "Three Stories About The Chance Of Casting A Pivotal Vote," Working Paper 1265, Economics Department, Queen's University.
  8. Drouvelis, Michalis & Saporiti, Alejandro & Vriend, Nicolaas J., 2014. "Political motivations and electoral competition: Equilibrium analysis and experimental evidence," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 86-115.
  9. Hideo Konishi & Chen-Yu Pan, 2020. "Silent promotion of agendas: campaign contributions and ideological polarization," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 182(1), pages 93-117, January.
  10. Aytimur, R. Emre & Suen, Richard M. H., 2024. "Information Quality, Disagreement and Political Polarisation," MPRA Paper 121112, University Library of Munich, Germany.
  11. Joseph McMurray, 2017. "Ideology as Opinion: A Spatial Model of Common-Value Elections," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 9(4), pages 108-140, November.
  12. Di Guilmi, Corrado & Galanis, Giorgos, 2021. "Convergence and divergence in dynamic voting with inequality," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 187(C), pages 137-158.
  13. Klingelhöfer, Jan, 2011. "Lexicographic Voting," VfS Annual Conference 2011 (Frankfurt, Main): The Order of the World Economy - Lessons from the Crisis 48701, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
  14. Krasa, Stefan & Polborn, Mattias, 2010. "Competition between Specialized Candidates," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 104(4), pages 745-765, November.
  15. Foucart, Renaud & Schmidt, Robert C., 2019. "(Almost) efficient information transmission in elections," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 147-165.
  16. Ben Lockwood & James Rockey, 2020. "Negative Voters? Electoral Competition with Loss-Aversion," The Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 130(632), pages 2619-2648.
  17. John Duggan & César Martinelli, 2020. "Electoral Accountability and Responsive Democracy," The Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 130(627), pages 675-715.
  18. Venkatesh, Raghul S, 2017. "Activism, Costly Participation, and Polarization," CRETA Online Discussion Paper Series 30, Centre for Research in Economic Theory and its Applications CRETA.
  19. repec:lan:wpaper:1711 is not listed on IDEAS
  20. Alejandro Saporiti, 2014. "Power sharing and electoral equilibrium," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 55(3), pages 705-729, April.
  21. McMurray, Joseph, 2022. "Polarization and pandering in common-interest elections," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 133(C), pages 150-161.
  22. Raphael Boleslavsky & Christopher Cotton, 2015. "Information and Extremism in Elections," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 7(1), pages 165-207, February.
  23. Correa-Lopera, Guadalupe, 2024. "Implementing direct democracy via representation," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 85-92.
  24. Klingelhöfer Jan, 2015. "Lexicographic Voting: Holding Parties Accountable in the Presence of Downsian Competition," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 15(4), pages 1867-1892, October.
  25. Norman Schofield & Christopher Claassen & Ugur Ozdemir & Alexei Zakharov, 2011. "Estimating the effects of activists in two-party and multi-party systems: comparing the United States and Israel," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 36(3), pages 483-518, April.
  26. Zudenkova, Galina, 2013. "Provision of Differentiated Public Goods within Organizations," MPRA Paper 50489, University Library of Munich, Germany.
  27. Câmara, Odilon & Bernhardt, Dan, 2015. "Learning about challengers," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 181-206.
  28. Bernheim, B. Douglas & Bodoh-Creed, Aaron L., 2020. "A theory of decisive leadership," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 146-168.
  29. Aytimur, Emre & Boukouras, Aris & Suen, Richard M. H., 2024. "How Does Political Uncertainty Affect the Optimal Degree of Policy Divergence?," MPRA Paper 122279, University Library of Munich, Germany.
  30. 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.
  31. Emanuel V. Towfigh & Sebastian J. Goerg & Andreas Glöckner & Philip Leifeld & Aniol Llorente-Saguer & Sophie Bade & Carlos Kurschilgen, 2016. "Do direct-democratic procedures lead to higher acceptance than political representation?," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 167(1), pages 47-65, April.
  32. Tim Willems, 2014. "You Can Go Your Own Way: Explaining Partisan Support for Independence," Economics Series Working Papers 717, University of Oxford, Department of Economics.
  33. Graham, Brett & Bernhardt, Dan, 2015. "Flexibility vs. protection from an unrepresentative legislative majority," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 59-88.
  34. repec:lan:wpaper:1932 is not listed on IDEAS
  35. Justin Mattias Valasek, 2012. "Get Out The Vote: How Encouraging Voting Changes Political Outcomes," Economics and Politics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 24(3), pages 346-373, November.
  36. repec:lan:wpaper:616564 is not listed on IDEAS
  37. Prato, Carlo & Wolton, Stephane, 2017. "Wisdom of the Crowd? Information Aggregation and Electoral Incentives," MPRA Paper 82753, University Library of Munich, Germany.
  38. Nunnari, Salvatore & Zápal, Jan, 2017. "Dynamic Elections and Ideological Polarization," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 25(4), pages 505-534, October.
  39. Hummel, Patrick, 2010. "Flip-flopping from primaries to general elections," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 94(11-12), pages 1020-1027, December.
  40. Emanuel Towfigh & Andreas Glöckner & Sebastian Goerg & Philip Leifeld & Carlos Kurschilgen & Aniol Llorente-Saguer & Sophie Bade, 2013. "Does Political Representation through Parties Decrease Voters' Acceptance of Decisions?," Discussion Paper Series of the Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods 2013_10, Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods.
  41. William Howell & Stefan Krasa & Mattias Polborn, 2020. "Political Conflict over Time," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 64(3), pages 554-568, July.
  42. Paula González & Francesca Passarelli & M. Socorro Puy, 2019. "Discipline, party switching and policy divergence," Working Papers 19.05, Universidad Pablo de Olavide, Department of Economics.
  43. Raghul S. Venkatesh, 2020. "Political activism and polarization," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 22(5), pages 1530-1558, September.
IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.