IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/intfor/v21y2005i1p53-71.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Consideration sets, intentions and the inclusion of "don't know" in a two-stage model for voter choice

Author

Listed:
  • Paap, Richard
  • van Nierop, Erjen
  • van Heerde, Harald J.
  • Wedel, Michel
  • Franses, Philip Hans
  • Alsem, Karel Jan

Abstract

We present a statistical model for voter choice that incorporates a consideration set stage and final vote intention stage. The first stage involves a multivariate probit model for the vector of probabilities that a candidate or a party gets considered. The second stage of the model is a multinomial probit model for the actual choice. In both stages we use as explanatory variables data on voter choice at the previous election, as well as socio-demographic respondent characteristics. Importantly, our model explicitly accounts for the three types of "missing data" encountered in polling. First, we include a no-vote option in the final vote intention stage. Second, the "do not know" response is assumed to arise from too little difference in the utility between the two most preferred options in the consideration set. Third, the "do not want to say" response is modelled as a missing observation on the most preferred alternative in the consideration set. Thus, we consider the missing data generating mechanism to be non-ignorable and build a model based on utility maximization to describe the voting intentions of these respondents. We illustrate the merits of the model as we have information on a sample of about 5000 individuals from the Netherlands for who we know how they voted last time (if at all), which parties they would consider for the upcoming election, and what their voting intention is. A unique feature of the data set is that information is available on actual individual voting behavior, measured at the day of election. We find that the inclusion of the consideration set stage in the model enables the user to make more precise inferences on the competitive structure in the political domain and to get better out-of-sample forecasts.
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)

Suggested Citation

  • Paap, Richard & van Nierop, Erjen & van Heerde, Harald J. & Wedel, Michel & Franses, Philip Hans & Alsem, Karel Jan, 2005. "Consideration sets, intentions and the inclusion of "don't know" in a two-stage model for voter choice," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 21(1), pages 53-71.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:intfor:v:21:y:2005:i:1:p:53-71
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0169-2070(04)00014-7
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version below or search for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. P. L. H. Yu & K. Lam, 1997. "How to predict election winners from a poll," Journal of Applied Statistics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 24(1), pages 11-24.
    2. McCulloch, Robert E. & Polson, Nicholas G. & Rossi, Peter E., 2000. "A Bayesian analysis of the multinomial probit model with fully identified parameters," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 99(1), pages 173-193, November.
    3. Peter Lynn & Roger Jowell, 1996. "How Might Opinion Polls be Improved?: The Case for Probability Sampling," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 159(1), pages 21-28, January.
    4. Ray C. Fair, 1996. "Econometrics and Presidential Elections," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 10(3), pages 89-102, Summer.
    5. John Geweke, 1999. "Using simulation methods for bayesian econometric models: inference, development,and communication," Econometric Reviews, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(1), pages 1-73.
    6. P. Damlen & J. Wakefield & S. Walker, 1999. "Gibbs sampling for Bayesian non‐conjugate and hierarchical models by using auxiliary variables," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 61(2), pages 331-344, April.
    7. van Nierop, J.E.M. & Paap, R. & Bronnenberg, B. & Franses, Ph.H.B.F., 2000. "Modeling Unobserved Consideration Sets for Household Panel Data," ERIM Report Series Research in Management ERS-2000-42-MKT, Erasmus Research Institute of Management (ERIM), ERIM is the joint research institute of the Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University and the Erasmus School of Economics (ESE) at Erasmus University Rotterdam.
    8. Swank, O H & Eisinga, R, 1999. "Economic Outcomes and Voting Behaviour in a Multi-party System: An Application to the Netherlands," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 101(3-4), pages 195-213, December.
    9. Keane, Michael P, 1992. "A Note on Identification in the Multinomial Probit Model," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 10(2), pages 193-200, April.
    10. Schofield, Normal & Martin, Andrew D. & Quinn, Kevin M. & Whitford, Andrew B., 1998. "Multiparty Electoral Competition in the Netherlands and Germany: A Model Based on Multinomial Probit," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 97(3), pages 257-293, December.
    11. McCulloch, Robert & Rossi, Peter E., 1994. "An exact likelihood analysis of the multinomial probit model," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 64(1-2), pages 207-240.
    12. John Geweke, 1999. "Using Simulation Methods for Bayesian Econometric Models," Computing in Economics and Finance 1999 832, Society for Computational Economics.
    13. Geweke, John, 1996. "Bayesian reduced rank regression in econometrics," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 75(1), pages 121-146, November.
    14. Langche Zeng, 2000. "A Heteroscedastic Generalized Extreme Value Discrete Choice Model," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 29(1), pages 118-144, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Richard Paap, 2002. "What are the advantages of MCMC based inference in latent variable models?," Statistica Neerlandica, Netherlands Society for Statistics and Operations Research, vol. 56(1), pages 2-22, February.
    2. Allenby, Greg M., 2017. "Structural forecasts for marketing data," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 433-441.

    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. Geweke, J. & Joel Horowitz & Pesaran, M.H., 2006. "Econometrics: A Bird’s Eye View," Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 0655, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.
    2. HOOGERHEIDE, Lennart F. & VAN DIJK, Herman K. & VAN OEST, Rutger D., 2007. "Simulation based Bayesian econometric inference: principles and some recent computational advances," LIDAM Discussion Papers CORE 2007015, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
    3. Richard Paap & Philip Hans Franses, 2000. "A dynamic multinomial probit model for brand choice with different long-run and short-run effects of marketing-mix variables," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 15(6), pages 717-744.
    4. Andrea Carriero & Francesco Corsello & Massimiliano Marcellino, 2022. "The global component of inflation volatility," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 37(4), pages 700-721, June.
    5. Gael M. Martin & David T. Frazier & Christian P. Robert, 2020. "Computing Bayes: Bayesian Computation from 1763 to the 21st Century," Monash Econometrics and Business Statistics Working Papers 14/20, Monash University, Department of Econometrics and Business Statistics.
    6. Karlsson, Sune, 2013. "Forecasting with Bayesian Vector Autoregression," Handbook of Economic Forecasting, in: G. Elliott & C. Granger & A. Timmermann (ed.), Handbook of Economic Forecasting, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 0, pages 791-897, Elsevier.
    7. Maksym, Obrizan, 2010. "A Bayesian Model of Sample Selection with a Discrete Outcome Variable," MPRA Paper 28577, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    8. Gary Koop & Rodney Strachan & Herman van Dijk & Mattias Villani, 2004. "Bayesian Approaches to Cointegration," Discussion Papers in Economics 04/27, Division of Economics, School of Business, University of Leicester.
    9. John Geweke & Gautam Gowrisankaran & Robert J. Town, 2003. "Bayesian Inference for Hospital Quality in a Selection Model," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 71(4), pages 1215-1238, July.
    10. Ricardo A. Daziano & Martin Achtnicht, 2014. "Forecasting Adoption of Ultra-Low-Emission Vehicles Using Bayes Estimates of a Multinomial Probit Model and the GHK Simulator," Transportation Science, INFORMS, vol. 48(4), pages 671-683, November.
    11. Gael Martin, 2001. "Bayesian Analysis Of A Fractional Cointegration Model," Econometric Reviews, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(2), pages 217-234.
    12. Carriero, Andrea & Kapetanios, George & Marcellino, Massimiliano, 2016. "Structural analysis with Multivariate Autoregressive Index models," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 192(2), pages 332-348.
    13. Villani, Mattias, 2005. "Bayesian Inference of General Linear Restrictions on the Cointegration Space," Working Paper Series 189, Sveriges Riksbank (Central Bank of Sweden).
    14. Fuentes-Albero, Cristina & Melosi, Leonardo, 2013. "Methods for computing marginal data densities from the Gibbs output," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 175(2), pages 132-141.
    15. Piatek, Rémi & Gensowski, Miriam, 2017. "A Multinomial Probit Model with Latent Factors: Identification and Interpretation without a Measurement System," IZA Discussion Papers 11042, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    16. Brownstone, David, 2001. "Discrete Choice Modeling for Transportation," University of California Transportation Center, Working Papers qt29v7d1pk, University of California Transportation Center.
    17. Hoogerheide, Lennart F. & Kaashoek, Johan F. & van Dijk, Herman K., 2007. "On the shape of posterior densities and credible sets in instrumental variable regression models with reduced rank: An application of flexible sampling methods using neural networks," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 139(1), pages 154-180, July.
    18. Veyssiere, Luc Pierre, 2009. "A three essays dissertation on agricultural and environmental microeconomics," ISU General Staff Papers 200901010800001958, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    19. Böhl, Gregor, 2022. "Ensemble MCMC sampling for robust Bayesian inference," IMFS Working Paper Series 177, Goethe University Frankfurt, Institute for Monetary and Financial Stability (IMFS).
    20. Didier Nibbering, 2019. "A High-dimensional Multinomial Choice Model," Monash Econometrics and Business Statistics Working Papers 19/19, Monash University, Department of Econometrics and Business Statistics.

    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:eee:intfor:v:21:y:2005:i:1:p:53-71. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/ijforecast .

    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.