IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/jothpo/v26y2014i1p35-58.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Linear and quadratic utility loss functions in voting behavior research

Author

Listed:
  • Shane Singh

Abstract

Numerous studies examine voting behavior based on the formal theoretical predictions of the spatial utility model. These studies model individual utility from the election of a preferred party or candidate as decreasing as the alternative deviates from one’s ideal point, but differ as to whether this loss should be modeled linearly or quadratically. After advancing a theoretical argument for linear loss, this paper uses a wealth of data across 20 countries to empirically examine the predictive power of these two loss functions in terms of both voter choice and voter turnout. Results indicate that the linear loss function outperforms the quadratic loss function. The findings have important implications for theoretical scholars seeking to model voter behavior, for observational scholars, who must assign utility values across parties to individuals under study, and for experimental researchers, who must entice individuals with particular utility loss functions.

Suggested Citation

  • Shane Singh, 2014. "Linear and quadratic utility loss functions in voting behavior research," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 26(1), pages 35-58, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:jothpo:v:26:y:2014:i:1:p:35-58
    DOI: 10.1177/0951629813488985
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0951629813488985
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0951629813488985?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Matt Golder & Jacek Stramski, 2010. "Ideological Congruence and Electoral Institutions," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 54(1), pages 90-106, January.
    2. Grynaviski, Jeffrey D. & Corrigan, Bryce E., 2006. "Specification Issues in Proximity Models of Candidate Evaluation (with Issue Importance)," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 14(4), pages 393-420, October.
    3. Richard D. McKelvey & Richard E. Wendell, 1976. "Voting Equilibria in Multidimensional Choice Spaces," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 1(2), pages 144-158, May.
    4. Ernesto Calvo & Timothy Hellwig, 2011. "Centripetal and Centrifugal Incentives under Different Electoral Systems," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 55(1), pages 27-41, January.
    5. Thurner, Paul W & Eymann, Angelika, 2000. "Policy-Specific Alienation and Indifference in the Calculus of Voting: A Simultaneous Model of Party Choice and Abstention," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 102(1-2), pages 51-77, January.
    6. Wittman, Donald, 2007. "Candidate quality, pressure group endorsements and the nature of political advertising," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 23(2), pages 360-378, June.
    7. Ordeshook,Peter C., 1986. "Game Theory and Political Theory," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521315937.
    8. Alvarez, R. Michael & Nagler, Jonathan, 2004. "Party System Compactness: Measurement and Consequences," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 12(1), pages 46-62, January.
    9. Enelow,James M. & Hinich,Melvin J., 1984. "The Spatial Theory of Voting," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521275156.
    10. Merrill, Samuel & Adams, James, 2001. "Computing Nash Equilibria in Probabilistic, Multiparty Spatial Models with Nonpolicy Components," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 9(4), pages 347-361, January.
    11. Michael Peress, 2011. "Securing the base: electoral competition under variable turnout," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 148(1), pages 87-104, July.
    12. Anthony Downs, 1957. "An Economic Theory of Political Action in a Democracy," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 65, pages 135-135.
    13. Jackman, Robert W., 1987. "Political Institutions and Voter Turnout in the Industrial Democracies," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 81(2), pages 405-423, June.
    14. Riker, William H. & Ordeshook, Peter C., 1968. "A Theory of the Calculus of Voting," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 62(1), pages 25-42, March.
    15. Page, Benjamin I., 1976. "The Theory of Political Ambiguity," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 70(3), pages 742-752, September.
    16. Lin, Tse-Min & Enelow, James M & Dorussen, Han, 1999. "Equilibrium in Multicandidate Probabilistic Spatial Voting," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 98(1-2), pages 59-82, January.
    17. Thomas Palfrey & Howard Rosenthal, 1983. "A strategic calculus of voting," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 41(1), pages 7-53, January.
    18. Davis, Otto A. & Hinich, Melvin J. & Ordeshook, Peter C., 1970. "An Expository Development of a Mathematical Model of the Electoral Process," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 64(2), pages 426-448, June.
    19. Riker, William H. & Ordeshook, Peter C., 1968. "A Theory of the Calculus of Voting," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 62(1), pages 25-42, March.
    20. Budge, Ian & Ezrow, Lawrence & McDonald, Michael D., 2010. "Ideology, Party Factionalism and Policy Change: An integrated dynamic theory," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 40(4), pages 781-804, October.
    21. Gunnar Olsson & Stephen Gale, 1968. "Spatial Theory And Human Behaviour," Papers in Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 21(1), pages 229-242, January.
    22. Joel M. Guttman & Naftali Hilger & Yochanan Shachmurove, 1994. "Voting as Investment vs. Voting as Consumption: New Evidence," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 47(2), pages 197-207, May.
    23. Duch, Raymond M. & May, Jeff & Armstrong, David A., 2010. "Coalition-directed Voting in Multiparty Democracies," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 104(4), pages 698-719, November.
    24. Wittman, Donald A., 1973. "Parties as Utility Maximizers," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 67(2), pages 490-498, June.
    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. Mauerer, Ingrid & Pößnecker, Wolfgang & Thurner, Paul W. & Tutz, Gerhard, 2015. "Modeling electoral choices in multiparty systems with high-dimensional data: A regularized selection of parameters using the lasso approach," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 16(C), pages 23-42.

    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. Alexander A. Schuessler, 2000. "Expressive Voting," Rationality and Society, , vol. 12(1), pages 87-119, February.
    2. Sacha Bourgeois-Gironde & João V. Ferreira, 2020. "Conflicted voters: A spatial voting model with multiple party identifications," Post-Print hal-02909682, HAL.
    3. William H. Kaempfer & Anton D. Lowenberg, 1993. "A Threshold Model of Electoral Policy and Voter Turnout," Rationality and Society, , vol. 5(1), pages 107-126, January.
    4. João Amaro de Matos & Pedro Barros, 2004. "Social Norms and the Paradox of Elections’ Turnout," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 121(1), pages 239-255, October.
    5. Michelsen, Claus & Bönisch, Peter & Rosenfeld, Martin T. W., 2010. "Sharing Competences: The Impact of Local Institutional Settings on Voter Turnout," IWH Discussion Papers 21/2010, Halle Institute for Economic Research (IWH).
    6. Ming Li & Dipjyoti Majumdar, 2010. "A Psychologically Based Model of Voter Turnout," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 12(5), pages 979-1002, October.
    7. Schnellenbach, Jan & Schubert, Christian, 2015. "Behavioral political economy: A survey," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 40(PB), pages 395-417.
    8. Alastair Smith & Bruce Bueno de Mesquita & Tom LaGatta, 2017. "Group incentives and rational voting1," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 29(2), pages 299-326, April.
    9. Battaglini, Marco, 2005. "Sequential voting with abstention," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 51(2), pages 445-463, May.
    10. Assar Lindbeck & Jörgen Weibull, 1987. "Balanced-budget redistribution as the outcome of political competition," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 52(3), pages 273-297, January.
    11. Stefano Bartolini, 2000. "Collusion, Competition and Democracy," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 12(1), pages 33-65, January.
    12. Hortala-Vallve, Rafael & Esteve-Volart, Berta, 2011. "Voter turnout and electoral competition in a multidimensional policy space," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 27(2), pages 376-384, June.
    13. Antonio Merlo & Thomas R. Palfrey, 2018. "External validation of voter turnout models by concealed parameter recovery," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 176(1), pages 297-314, July.
    14. Fosco, Constanza & Laruelle, Annick & Sánchez, Angel, 2009. "Turnout Intention and Social Networks," IKERLANAK info:eu-repo/grantAgreeme, Universidad del País Vasco - Departamento de Fundamentos del Análisis Económico I.
    15. Valentina A. Bali & Lindon J. Robison & Richard Winder, 2020. "What Motivates People to Vote? The Role of Selfishness, Duty, and Social Motives When Voting," SAGE Open, , vol. 10(4), pages 21582440209, October.
    16. Martins, Rodrigo & Veiga, Francisco José, 2014. "Does voter turnout affect the votes for the incumbent government?," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 274-286.
    17. Stefano Camatarri & Francesco Zucchini, 2019. "Government coalitions and Eurosceptic voting in the 2014 European Parliament elections," European Union Politics, , vol. 20(3), pages 425-446, September.
    18. Igerseim, Herrade & Baujard, Antoinette & Laslier, Jean-François, 2016. "La question du vote. Expérimentations en laboratoire et In Situ," L'Actualité Economique, Société Canadienne de Science Economique, vol. 92(1-2), pages 151-189, Mars-Juin.
    19. Frank, Bjorn & Pitlik, Hans & Wirth, Steffen, 2004. "Expert opinion leaders' impact on voter turnout: the case of the Internet Chess Match Kasparov vs. World," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 20(3), pages 619-635, September.
    20. Tim Powlowski & Dennis Coates, 2013. "The habit for voting, “civic duty” and travel distance," UMBC Economics Department Working Papers 13-05, UMBC Department of Economics.

    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:sae:jothpo:v:26:y:2014:i:1:p:35-58. 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: SAGE Publications (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.