The impact of closeness on turnout: An empirical relation based on a study of a two-round ballot
Several methodological difficulties emerge from the empirical evaluation of the impact of closeness on turnout. The most critical resides in the use of the actual electoral results to assess the impact of closeness. Important doubt therefore remains with respect to the empirical validity of the relationship between turnout and closeness. This article intends to explore this ambiguity by an econometric analysis of the two-round French legislative elections. The first ballot gives excellent information to the voters on the expected closeness of the upcoming second ballot. The results show that closeness, whatever its measure, has an important and meaningful impact on electoral participation. Copyright Springer Science + Business Media, Inc. 2006
References listed on IDEAS
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.:
- Amrita Dhillon & Susana Peralta, 2002.
"Economic Theories Of Voter Turnout,"
Royal Economic Society, vol. 112(480), pages F332-F352, June.
- Barry Nalebuff & Ron Shachar, 1999.
"Follow the Leader: Theory and Evidence on Political Participation,"
American Economic Review,
American Economic Association, vol. 89(3), pages 525-547, June.
- Barry Nalebuff & Roni Shachar, 1997. "Follow The Leader: Theory And Evidence On Political Participation," Yale School of Management Working Papers ysm57, Yale School of Management.
- Mutsusaka, J.G. & Palda, F., 1991.
"The Downsian Voter Meets the Ecological Fallacy,"
91-30, Southern California - School of Business Administration.
- Timothy J. Feddersen, 2004. "Rational Choice Theory and the Paradox of Not Voting," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 18(1), pages 99-112, Winter.
- Matsusaka, John G, 1993.
" Election Closeness and Voter Turnout: Evidence from California Ballot Propositions,"
Springer, vol. 76(4), pages 313-34, August.
- Matsusaka, J.C., 1991. "Election Closeness and Voter Turnout: Evidence from California Ballot Propositions," Papers 91-29, Southern California - School of Business Administration.
- Kirchgassner, Gebhard & Schimmelpfenning, Jorg, 1992. " Closeness Counts If It Matters for Electoral Victory: Some Empirical Results for the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 73(3), pages 283-99, April.
- Chapman, Randall G & Palda, Kristian S, 1983. " Electoral Turnout in Rational Voting and Consumption Perspectives," Journal of Consumer Research, Oxford University Press, vol. 9(4), pages 337-46, March.
- Grofman, Bernard & Collet, Christian & Griffin, Robert, 1998. " Analyzing the Turnout-Competition Link with Aggregate Cross-Sectional Data," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 95(3-4), pages 233-46, June.
- Gelman, Andrew & Katz, Jonathan N. & Bafumi, Joseph, 2002. "Standard Voting Power Indexes Don't Work: An Empirical Analysis," Working Papers 1133, California Institute of Technology, Division of the Humanities and Social Sciences.
- Mueller,Dennis C., 2003. "Public Choice III," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521894753, 1.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:kap:pubcho:v:127:y:2006:i:3:p:461-483. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Sonal Shukla)or (Christopher F. Baum)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.