IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/apsrev/v91y1997i04p865-883_21.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Distance versus Direction: The Illusory Defeat of the Proximity Theory of Electoral Choice

Author

Listed:
  • Westholm, Anders

Abstract

In an extensive series of articles, Rabinowitz, Macdonald, and Listhaug have launched a new, directional theory of electoral choice. According to their claims, the new theory is superior to the classical Downsian proximity model. Such a conclusion, however, is not tenable. First, it fails to take proper account of the lower falsifiability of the directional model. Second, it rests on empirical analyses that do not test the two theories on the predictions they actually make. Both are theories of individual choice, which implies intrapersonal comparisons of utility. Prior tests, however, have predominantly taken the form of interpersonal comparisons. A reanalysis based on the proper type of comparison yields an outcome diametrically opposed to that previously obtained. It also reveals an eccentricity effect that largely accounts for the apparent success of the directional model.

Suggested Citation

  • Westholm, Anders, 1997. "Distance versus Direction: The Illusory Defeat of the Proximity Theory of Electoral Choice," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 91(4), pages 865-883, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:apsrev:v:91:y:1997:i:04:p:865-883_21
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S000305540021304X/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Thomas Knight & Fan Li & Lindsey Woodworth, 2017. "It’s My Party and I’ll Vote How I Want to: Experimental Evidence of Directional Voting in Two-Candidate Elections," Eastern Economic Journal, Palgrave Macmillan;Eastern Economic Association, vol. 43(4), pages 660-676, September.
    2. Fabian Gouret & Guillaume Hollard & Stéphane Rossignol, 2011. "An empirical analysis of valence in electoral competition," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 37(2), pages 309-340, July.
    3. Paul V. Warwick, 2004. "Proximity, Directionality, and the Riddle of Relative Party Extremeness," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 16(3), pages 263-287, July.
    4. Kirill Zhirkov, 2014. "New Political Issues, Niche Parties, And Spatial Voting In Multiparty Systems: Immigration As A Dimension Of Electoral Competition In Scandinavia," HSE Working papers WP BRP 12/PS/2014, National Research University Higher School of Economics.
    5. Wouter van der Brug, 2001. "Perceptions, Opinions and Party Preferences in the Face of a Real World Event," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 13(1), pages 53-80, January.
    6. Wagner Antonio Kamakura, 2016. "Using Voter-choice Modeling to Plan Final Campaigns in Runoff Elections," RAC - Revista de Administração Contemporânea (Journal of Contemporary Administration), ANPAD - Associação Nacional de Pós-Graduação e Pesquisa em Administração, vol. 20(6), pages 753-776.
    7. Olle Folke, 2014. "Shades Of Brown And Green: Party Effects In Proportional Election Systems," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 12(5), pages 1361-1395, October.
    8. Eguia, Jon X., 2011. "Foundations of spatial preferences," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 47(2), pages 200-205, March.
    9. Isaac Duerr & Thomas Knight & Lindsey Woodworth, 2019. "Evidence on the Effect of Political Platform Transparency on Partisan Voting," Eastern Economic Journal, Palgrave Macmillan;Eastern Economic Association, vol. 45(3), pages 331-349, June.
    10. Samuel Merrill III & Bernard Grofman, 1997. "Symposium. The Directional Theory of Issue Voting: II," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 9(1), pages 25-48, January.
    11. Jon Eguia, 2013. "On the spatial representation of preference profiles," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 52(1), pages 103-128, January.
    12. Welzel, Christian & Cusack, Thomas R., 1999. "Näherung oder Richtung? Der Theorienstreit der Wahlforschung aus der Sicht politischer Repräsentation," Discussion Papers, Research Unit: Institutions and Social Change FS III 99-201, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.

    More about this item

    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:cup:apsrev:v:91:y:1997:i:04:p:865-883_21. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/psr .

    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.