IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2605.25131.html

Single-Peakedness Does Not Prevent Leapfrogging under Abstention

Author

Listed:
  • Aman Ray
  • Srikanth B. Pai

Abstract

Parties in spatial competition rarely choose platforms that reverse their ideological order. Mutual leapfrogging is the strongest form of reversal: each party locates beyond the other party's ideal point. In voting models without abstention single-peakedness rules out such reversals. We show that this conclusion does not survive endogenous abstention. There is a spatial voting model in which voter and party preferences are single-peaked, yet mutual leapfrogging occurs in pure-strategy equilibrium. The equilibrium survives because some deviations change which voters participate. We prove that such equilibria are impossible under a sufficient ordinal condition: parties agree on how to rank leftward and rightward deviations from their ideal points. The condition is general enough to cover symmetric single-peaked utilities and common translated utility shapes.

Suggested Citation

  • Aman Ray & Srikanth B. Pai, 2026. "Single-Peakedness Does Not Prevent Leapfrogging under Abstention," Papers 2605.25131, arXiv.org.
  • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2605.25131
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2605.25131
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Adams, James, 2001. "A Theory of Spatial Competition with Biased Voters: Party Policies Viewed Temporally and Comparatively," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 31(1), pages 121-158, January.
    2. Wittman, Donald, 1983. "Candidate Motivation: A Synthesis of Alternative Theories," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 77(1), pages 142-157, March.
    3. Humberto G. Llavador, 2000. "original papers : Abstention and political competition," Review of Economic Design, Springer;Society for Economic Design, vol. 5(4), pages 411-432.
    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. Ivo Bischoff, 2005. "Party competition in a heterogeneous electorate: The role of dominant-issue voters," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 122(1), pages 221-243, January.
    2. Samuel Merrill III & James Adams, 2002. "Centrifugal Incentives in Multi-Candidate Elections," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 14(3), pages 275-300, July.
    3. Persson, Torsten & Tabellini, Guido, 2002. "Political economics and public finance," Handbook of Public Economics, in: A. J. Auerbach & M. Feldstein (ed.), Handbook of Public Economics, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 24, pages 1549-1659, Elsevier.
    4. Alan E. Wiseman, 2006. "A Theory of Partisan Support and Entry Deterrence in Electoral Competition," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 18(2), pages 123-158, April.
    5. Francisco Martínez-Mora & M. Socorro Puy, 2009. "Off-the-peak preferences over government size," Working Papers 2009-9, Universidad de Málaga, Department of Economic Theory, Málaga Economic Theory Research Center.
    6. Assar Lindbeck & Jörgen Weibull, 1987. "Balanced-budget redistribution as the outcome of political competition," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 52(3), pages 273-297, January.
    7. Juan Carlos Berganza, 1998. "Relationships Between Politicians and Voters Through Elections: A Review Essay," Working Papers wp1998_9809, CEMFI.
    8. Andina-Díaz, Ascensión & Feri, Francesco & Meléndez-Jiménez, Miguel A., 2021. "Institutional flexibility, political alternation, and middle-of-the-road policies," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 204(C).
    9. John Jackson, 2014. "Location, location, location: the Davis-Hinich model of electoral competition," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 159(1), pages 197-218, April.
    10. Jo Thori Lind & Dominic Rohner, 2017. "Knowledge is Power: A Theory of Information, Income and Welfare Spending," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 84(336), pages 611-646, October.
    11. Cusack, Thomas R., 1995. "Partisan politics and public finance: changes in public spending in the industrialized democracies, 1955-1989," Discussion Papers, Research Unit: Economic Change and Employment FS I 95-313, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.
    12. Alessandro Morselli, 2021. "Individual decisions and collective choices in the history of economic thought," Economic Thought journal, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences - Economic Research Institute, issue 3, pages 77-96,97-11.
    13. Stergios Skaperdas & Samarth Vaidya, 2025. "Investing in influence: how minority interests can prevail in a democracy," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 79(4), pages 1191-1224, June.
    14. Prasenjit Banerjee & Vegard Iversen & Sandip Mitra & Antonio Nicolò & Kunal Sen, 2018. "Politicians and Their Promises in an Uncertain World: Evidence from a Lab-in-the-Field Experiment in India," Economics Discussion Paper Series 1806, Economics, The University of Manchester.
    15. Antonio Merlo, 2005. "Whither Political Economy? Theories, Facts and Issues," PIER Working Paper Archive 05-033, Penn Institute for Economic Research, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania, revised 01 Dec 2005.
    16. Lodewijk Smets & Stephen Knack & Nadia Molenaers, 2013. "Political ideology, quality at entry and the success of economic reform programs," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 8(4), pages 447-476, December.
    17. Sutirtha Bagchi, 2013. "The Effects of Political Competition on the Funding and Generosity of Public-Sector Pension Plans," 2013 Papers pba941, Job Market Papers.
    18. Kolios Bill, 2019. "Political Business Cycles in Australia Elections and Party Ideology," Journal of Time Series Econometrics, De Gruyter, vol. 11(2), pages 1-9, July.
    19. Andrew Abbott & Philip Jones, 2024. "Are government expenditures more cyclical the more they finance the provision of public goods?," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 77(3), pages 574-592, August.
    20. Mihir Bhattacharya, 2024. "A citizen-candidate model of party formation," SERIEs: Journal of the Spanish Economic Association, Springer;Spanish Economic Association, vol. 15(3), pages 299-325, September.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:arx:papers:2605.25131. 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: arXiv administrators (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://arxiv.org/ .

    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.