IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/jothpo/v37y2025i2p156-175.html

A formal model of party competition with salience

Author

Listed:
  • Anna-Sophie Kurella

Abstract

Recent empirical research points at the significance of issue salience for party competition and argues that small parties emphasize secondary issues. This article investigates parties’ salience strategies from a formal viewpoint. It presents a model of party competition that allows parties to compete with policy positions on a second dimension, and also to choose an optimal level of issue salience. Equilibrium results are computed based on artificial data. The results identify various relevant factors for policy divergence and emphasis on the second policy issue dimension, notably the structure of public opinion and non-policy related valence differences. The results suggest that it is not only challenger parties at the fringe, but also valence-advantaged parties that seek to push the salience of secondary policy issues.

Suggested Citation

  • Anna-Sophie Kurella, 2025. "A formal model of party competition with salience," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 37(2), pages 156-175, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:jothpo:v:37:y:2025:i:2:p:156-175
    DOI: 10.1177/09516298241312345
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/09516298241312345
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/09516298241312345?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. Lee Sigelman & Emmett H. Buell, 2004. "Avoidance or Engagement? Issue Convergence in U.S. Presidential Campaigns, 1960–2000," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 48(4), pages 650-661, October.
    2. Adams, James & Clark, Michael & Ezrow, Lawrence & Glasgow, Garrett, 2004. "Understanding Change and Stability in Party Ideologies: Do Parties Respond to Public Opinion or to Past Election Results?," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 34(4), pages 589-610, October.
    3. Meguid, Bonnie M., 2005. "Competition Between Unequals: The Role of Mainstream Party Strategy in Niche Party Success," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 99(3), pages 347-359, August.
    4. James Adams & Lawrence Ezrow & Zeynep Somer‐Topcu, 2011. "Is Anybody Listening? Evidence That Voters Do Not Respond to European Parties’ Policy Statements During Elections," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 55(2), pages 370-382, April.
    5. McKelvey, Richard D. & Patty, John W., 2006. "A theory of voting in large elections," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 57(1), pages 155-180, October.
    6. Anthony Downs, 1957. "An Economic Theory of Political Action in a Democracy," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 65(2), pages 135-135.
    7. Franzmann, Simon T. & Giebler, Heiko & Poguntke, Thomas, 2020. "It’s no longer the economy, stupid! Issue yield at the 2017 German federal election," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 43(3), pages 610-638.
    8. Carmines, Edward G. & Stimson, James A., 1986. "On the Structure and Sequence of Issue Evolution," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 80(3), pages 901-920, September.
    9. Basu, Chitralekha, 2020. "Bridging Spatial and Saliency Theory: Party Size and Issue Selection in Campaigns," Political Science Research and Methods, Cambridge University Press, vol. 8(3), pages 444-458, July.
    10. 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.
    11. Christoffer Green-Pedersen, 2007. "The Growing Importance of Issue Competition: The Changing Nature of Party Competition in Western Europe," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 55, pages 607-628, October.
    12. De Sio, Lorenzo & Weber, Till, 2014. "Issue Yield: A Model of Party Strategy in Multidimensional Space," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 108(4), pages 870-885, November.
    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. Jelle Koedam, 2021. "Avoidance, ambiguity, alternation: Position blurring strategies in multidimensional party competition," European Union Politics, , vol. 22(4), pages 655-675, December.
    2. Silke Adam & Eva-Maria Antl-Wittenberg & Beatrice Eugster & Melanie Leidecker-Sandmann & Michaela Maier & Franzisca Schmidt, 2017. "Strategies of pro-European parties in the face of a Eurosceptic challenge," European Union Politics, , vol. 18(2), pages 260-282, June.
    3. Christoph Arndt, 2016. "Issue evolution and partisan polarization in a European multiparty system: Elite and mass repositioning in Denmark 1968–2011," European Union Politics, , vol. 17(4), pages 660-682, December.
    4. Kirill Zhirkov, 2014. "New Political Issues, Niche Parties, And Spatial Voting In Multiparty Systems: Immigration As A Dimension Of Electoral Competition In Scandinavia," HSE Working papers WP BRP 12/PS/2014, National Research University Higher School of Economics.
    5. Christopher J. Williams & John Ishiyama, 2022. "How voter distributions, issue ownership, and position influence party emphasis," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 103(5), pages 1084-1100, September.
    6. Luigi Curini, 2015. "Explaining party ideological stances," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 162(1), pages 79-96, January.
    7. Adam, Antonis & Ftergioti, Stamatia, 2019. "Neighbors and friends: How do European political parties respond to globalization?," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 369-384.
    8. Catherine E. de Vries, 2007. "Sleeping Giant: Fact or Fairytale?," European Union Politics, , vol. 8(3), pages 363-385, September.
    9. Benček, David, 2016. "Opportunistic candidates and knowledgeable voters: A recipe for extreme views," Kiel Working Papers 2047, Kiel Institute for the World Economy.
    10. Catherine E. De Vries & Sara B. Hobolt, 2012. "When dimensions collide: The electoral success of issue entrepreneurs," European Union Politics, , vol. 13(2), pages 246-268, June.
    11. Ellger, Fabio & Klüver, Heike, 2025. "Adopting restriction: how coalition governments respond to radical right parties," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 48(6), pages 1299-1331.
    12. Ryan Bakker & Seth Jolly & Jonathan Polk, 2018. "Multidimensional incongruence and vote switching in Europe," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 176(1), pages 267-296, July.
    13. Jae-Jae Spoon, 2012. "How salient is Europe? An analysis of European election manifestos, 1979–2004," European Union Politics, , vol. 13(4), pages 558-579, December.
    14. Tim Bale & Christoffer Green‐Pedersen & André Krouwel & Kurt Richard Luther & Nick Sitter, 2010. "If You Can't Beat Them, Join Them? Explaining Social Democratic Responses to the Challenge from the Populist Radical Right in Western Europe," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 58(3), pages 410-426, June.
    15. Abou-Chadi, Tarik & Krause, Werner, 2020. "The Causal Effect of Radical Right Success on Mainstream Parties’ Policy Positions: A Regression Discontinuity Approach," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 50(3), pages 829-847.
    16. Edoardo Cefalà, 2022. "The political consequences of mass repatriation," Discussion Papers 2022-05, University of Nottingham, GEP.
    17. Christopher Williams & Jae-Jae Spoon, 2015. "Differentiated party response: The effect of Euroskeptic public opinion on party positions," European Union Politics, , vol. 16(2), pages 176-193, June.
    18. Giebler, Heiko & Meyer, Thomas M. & Wagner, Markus, 2021. "The changing meaning of left and right: supply- and demand-side effects on the perception of party positions," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 31(2), pages 243-262.
    19. Juan Pablo Micozzi & Sebastián M Saiegh, 2016. "An empirical stochastic model of Argentina’s Impossible Game (1955–1966)," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 28(2), pages 266-287, April.
    20. Alexei Zakharov & Dean Fantazzini, 2009. "Economic Factors in a Model of Voting: The Case of The Netherlands, Great Britain, and Israel," Applied Econometrics, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration (RANEPA), vol. 14(2), pages 57-73.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:sae:jothpo:v:37:y:2025:i:2:p:156-175. 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.