Election campaigns, agenda setting and electoral outcomes
AbstractFraming effects and bounded rationality imply that election campaigns may be an important determinant of election outcomes. This paper uses a two-party setting and simple game theoretic models to analyse the strategic interaction between the parties’ campaign decisions. Alternations of power emerge naturally, even if both electoral preferences and party positions remain constant.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Bibliographic InfoPaper provided by University of Massachusetts Amherst, Department of Economics in its series UMASS Amherst Economics Working Papers with number 2004-12.
Date of creation: Oct 2004
Date of revision:
Election; campaign platforms; agenda setting; cost of ruling; Condorcet;
Other versions of this item:
- Manfred Holler & Peter Skott, 2005. "Election campaigns, agenda setting and electoral outcomes," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 125(1), pages 215-228, July.
- D72 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Political Processes: Rent-seeking, Lobbying, Elections, Legislatures, and Voting Behavior
This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:
- NEP-CDM-2004-11-07 (Collective Decision-Making)
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Harsanyi,John C., 1986. "Rational Behaviour and Bargaining Equilibrium in Games and Social Situations," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521311830, October.
- Norman Schofield, 2003. "The founding of the American Agrarian Empire and the Conflict of Land and Capital," Homo Oeconomicus, Institute of SocioEconomics, vol. 19, pages 471-505.
- Amos Tversky & Daniel Kahneman, 1979.
"Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk,"
Levine's Working Paper Archive
7656, David K. Levine.
- Kahneman, Daniel & Tversky, Amos, 1979. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 47(2), pages 263-91, March.
- Backus, David & Driffill, John, 1985.
"Inflation and Reputation,"
American Economic Review,
American Economic Association, vol. 75(3), pages 530-38, June.
- Pearce, David G, 1984. "Rationalizable Strategic Behavior and the Problem of Perfection," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 52(4), pages 1029-50, July.
- Luciano Andreozzi, 2002. "Oscilliations in the Enforcement of Law: an Evolutionary Analysis," Homo Oeconomicus, Institute of SocioEconomics, vol. 18, pages 403-428.
- Kim Dixon & Norman Schofield, 2001. "The Election of Lincoln in 1860," Homo Oeconomicus, Institute of SocioEconomics, vol. 17, pages 391-425.
- Paldam, Martin & Skott, Peter, 1995. " A Rational-Voter Explanation of the Cost of Ruling," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 83(1-2), pages 159-72, April.
- Milesi-Ferretti, Gian Maria & Spolaore, Enrico, 1994. "How cynical can an incumbent be? Strategic policy in a model of government spending," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 55(1), pages 121-140, September.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Lisa Saunders).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.