IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/jas/jasssj/2010-42-2.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Model of Political Judgment: An Agent-Based Simulation of Candidate Evaluation

Author

Listed:
  • Sung-youn Kim

Abstract

This paper advances Kim, Taber, and Lodge's work (2010). Specifically, it is shown here that the psychological model of political judgment proposed by Kim et al (2010) is consistent with a set of well-known empirical regularities repeatedly found in electoral and psychological researches, that the model in general implies motivated reasoning - discounting contradictory information to the prior while accepting consistent information more or less at its face value - under general conditions, and that (prior) evaluative affect towards candidates plays a fundamental role in this process. It is also discussed the implication of motivated reasoning in accounting for the responsiveness, persistence, and polarization of candidate evaluation often observed in elections.

Suggested Citation

  • Sung-youn Kim, 2011. "A Model of Political Judgment: An Agent-Based Simulation of Candidate Evaluation," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 14(2), pages 1-3.
    • Handle: RePEc:jas:jasssj:2010-42-2
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.jasss.org/14/2/3/3.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lodge, Milton & Steenbergen, Marco R. & Brau, Shawn, 1995. "The Responsive Voter: Campaign Information and the Dynamics of Candidate Evaluation," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 89(2), pages 309-326, June.
    2. José Manuel Galán & Luis R. Izquierdo & Segismundo S. Izquierdo & José Ignacio Santos & Ricardo del Olmo & Adolfo López-Paredes & Bruce Edmonds, 2009. "Errors and Artefacts in Agent-Based Modelling," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 12(1), pages 1-1.
    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. Juan Manuel Larrosa, 2016. "Agentes computacionales y análisis económico," Revista de Economía Institucional, Universidad Externado de Colombia - Facultad de Economía, vol. 18(34), pages 87-113, January-J.
    2. Katjana Gattermann & Claes H De Vreese, 2017. "The role of candidate evaluations in the 2014 European Parliament elections: Towards the personalization of voting behaviour?," European Union Politics, , vol. 18(3), pages 447-468, September.
    3. J. Gareth Polhill, 2015. "Extracting OWL Ontologies from Agent-Based Models: A Netlogo Extension," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 18(2), pages 1-15.
    4. Markus Prior & Arthur Lupia, 2005. "What Citizens Know Depends on How You Ask Them: Experiments on Time, Money and Political Knowledge," Experimental 0510001, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    5. Flaminio Squazzoni, 2010. "The impact of agent-based models in the social sciences after 15 years of incursions," History of Economic Ideas, Fabrizio Serra Editore, Pisa - Roma, vol. 18(2), pages 197-234.
    6. Filip Palda, 2001. "Election Finance Regulation in Emerging Democracies: Lessons from Canada and the U.S," Public Economics 0111010, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    7. Rixen, Martin & Weigand, Jürgen, 2014. "Agent-based simulation of policy induced diffusion of smart meters," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 153-167.
    8. Lupia, Arthur & Prior, Markus, 2005. "What Citizens Know Depends on How You Ask Them: Political Knowledge and Political Learning Skills," MPRA Paper 103, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 25 Sep 2006.
    9. Lockwood, Ben & Le, Minh & Rockey, James, 2021. "Dynamic Electoral Competition with Voter Loss-Aversion and Imperfect Recall," QAPEC Discussion Papers 12, Quantitative and Analytical Political Economy Research Centre.
    10. Gabriel Miao Li & Josh Pasek & Jon A. Krosnick & Tobias H. Stark & Jennifer Agiesta & Gaurav Sood & Trevor Tompson & Wendy Gross, 2022. "Americans’ Attitudes toward the Affordable Care Act: What Role Do Beliefs Play?," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 700(1), pages 41-54, March.
    11. Paola Tubaro, 2011. "Computational Economics," Chapters, in: John B. Davis & D. Wade Hands (ed.), The Elgar Companion to Recent Economic Methodology, chapter 10, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    12. Georg Holtz & Christian Schnülle & Malcolm Yadack & Jonas Friege & Thorben Jensen & Pablo Thier & Peter Viebahn & Émile J. L. Chappin, 2020. "Using Agent-Based Models to Generate Transformation Knowledge for the German Energiewende—Potentials and Challenges Derived from Four Case Studies," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(22), pages 1-26, November.
    13. Nieddu, Marcello & Bertani, Filippo & Ponta, Linda, 2021. "Sustainability transition and digital trasformation: an agent-based perspective," MPRA Paper 106943, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    14. Li, Xiaolin & Rao, Raghunath Singh & Narasimhan, Om & Gao, Xing, 2022. "Stay positive or go negative? Memory imperfections and messaging strategy," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 39(4), pages 1127-1149.
    15. Katjana Gattermann & Claes De Vreese & Wouter van der Brug, 2016. "Evaluations of the Spitzenkandidaten: The Role of Information and News Exposure in Citizens’ Preference Formation," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 4(1), pages 37-54.
    16. Nancy Quinceno Cárdenas, 2014. "Modelación basada en agentes en el sistema pensional colombiano. Una aproximación desde el mercado laboral y la dinámica poblacional," Revista CIFE, Universidad Santo Tomás, September.
    17. N/A, 1997. "Individual Perception and Models of Issue Voting," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 9(1), pages 13-21, January.
    18. Susumu Shikano & Dominic Nyhuis, 2019. "The effect of incumbency on ideological and valence perceptions of parties in multilevel polities," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 181(3), pages 331-349, December.
    19. Sara Lumbreras & Sonja Wogrin & Guillermo Navarro & Ilaria Bertazzi & Maria Pereda, 2019. "A Decentralized Solution for Transmission Expansion Planning: Getting Inspiration from Nature," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(23), pages 1-17, November.
    20. James Adams & Simon Weschle & Christopher Wlezien, 2021. "Elite Interactions and Voters’ Perceptions of Parties’ Policy Positions," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 65(1), pages 101-114, January.

    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:jas:jasssj:2010-42-2. 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: Francesco Renzini (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.