Euclidean Revealed Preferences: Testing The Spatial Voting Model
In the spatial model of voting, voters choose the candidate closest to them in the ideological space. Recent work by (Degan and Merlo 2009) shows that it is falsifiable on the basis of individual voting data in multiple elections. We show how to tackle the fact that the model only partially identifies the distribution of voting profiles and we give a formal revealed preference test of the spatial voting model in 3 national elections in the US, and strongly reject the spatial model in all cases. We also construct confidence regions for partially identified voter characteristics in an augmented model with unobserved valence dimension, and identify the amount of voter heterogeneity necessary to reconcile the data with spatial preferences.
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)
To our knowledge, this item is not available for
download. To find whether it is available, there are three
1. Check below under "Related research" whether another version of this item is available online.
2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.
Volume (Year): 28 (2013)
Issue (Month): 4 (06)
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.interscience.wiley.com/jpages/0883-7252/|
|Order Information:|| Web: http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/jcatalog/subscribe.jsp?issn=0883-7252 Email: |
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.:
- Arie Beresteanu & Ilya Molchanov & Francesca Molinari, 2009. "Sharp identification regions in models with convex predictions: games, individual choice, and incomplete data," CeMMAP working papers CWP27/09, Centre for Microdata Methods and Practice, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
- Ruud H. Koning & Geert Ridder, 2003.
"Discrete choice and stochastic utility maximization,"
Royal Economic Society, vol. 6(1), pages 1-27, 06.
- Ruud H Koning & Geert Ridder, 1999. "Discrete Choice and Stochastic Utility Maximization," Economics Working Paper Archive 413, The Johns Hopkins University,Department of Economics.
- Jeong, Gyung-Ho, 2008. "Testing the Predictions of the Multidimensional Spatial Voting Model with Roll Call Data," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 16(02), pages 179-196, March.
- Heckman, James J, 1978. "Dummy Endogenous Variables in a Simultaneous Equation System," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 46(4), pages 931-959, July.
- James J. Heckman, 1977. "Dummy Endogenous Variables in a Simultaneous Equation System," NBER Working Papers 0177, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Borsch-Supan, Axel, 1990. "On the compatibility of nested logit models with utility maximization," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 43(3), pages 373-388, March.
- Nicholas Christakis & James Fowler & Guido Imbens & Karthik Kalyanaraman, 2010. "An empirical model for strategic network formation," CeMMAP working papers CWP16/10, Centre for Microdata Methods and Practice, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
- Nicholas A. Christakis & James H. Fowler & Guido W. Imbens & Karthik Kalyanaraman, 2010. "An Empirical Model for Strategic Network Formation," NBER Working Papers 16039, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Kalandrakis, Tasos, 2010. "Rationalizable voting," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 5(1), January.
- Tasos Kalandrakis, 2008. "Rationalizable Voting," Wallis Working Papers WP51, University of Rochester - Wallis Institute of Political Economy.
- 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.
- Chesher, Andrew D, 1984. "Testing for Neglected Heterogeneity," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 52(4), pages 865-872, July.
- Norman Schofield, 2007. "The Mean Voter Theorem: Necessary and Sufficient Conditions for Convergent Equilibrium," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 74(3), pages 965-980.
- Richard Blundell & Martin Browning & Ian Crawford, 2008. "Best Nonparametric Bounds on Demand Responses," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 76(6), pages 1227-1262, November.
- Richard Blundell & Martin Browning & Ian Crawford, 2005. "Best nonparametric bounds on demand responses," CeMMAP working papers CWP12/05, Centre for Microdata Methods and Practice, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
- Richard Blundell & Martin Browning & Ian Crawford, 2005. "Best Nonparametric Bounds on Demand Responses," CAM Working Papers 2005-16, University of Copenhagen. Department of Economics. Centre for Applied Microeconometrics.
- Richard Blundell & Martin Browning & Ian Crawford, 2005. "Best nonparametric bounds on demand responses," IFS Working Papers W05/20, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
- Bogomolnaia, Anna & Laslier, Jean-Francois, 2007. "Euclidean preferences," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(2), pages 87-98, February.
- Anna Bogomolnaïa & Jean-François Laslier, 2004. "Euclidean preferences," Working Papers hal-00242941, HAL.
- Li, Qi & Racine, Jeffrey S, 2008. "Nonparametric Estimation of Conditional CDF and Quantile Functions With Mixed Categorical and Continuous Data," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 26, pages 423-434.
- Degan, Arianna & Merlo, Antonio, 2009. "Do voters vote ideologically?," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 144(5), pages 1868-1894, September. Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:japmet:v:28:y:2013:i:4:p:650-666. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.