IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ema/worpap/2026-03.html

On the Pure Strategy Nash Equilibrium in the Spatial Model with Dual Additive Valence

Author

Listed:
  • Mathieu Martin
  • Linus Thierry Nana Noumi
  • Zéphirin Nganmeni
  • Ashley Piggins

    (CY Cergy Paris Université, THEMA)

Abstract

In spatial voting games, the valence is traditionally modeled as a non-ideological attribute that is uniformly assigned to a candidate by all voters, independent of their policy preferences. In its original for-mulation, additive valence is assumed to be entirely detached from the candidate policy considerations. In this paper, we explore an alterna-tive framework in which additive valence interacts with the candidates' policy platforms. Each candidate possesses an individual valence level,but voters choose to recognize this valence only if the candidate is perceived as competent in defending their proposed policy. This perceived competence is assumed to be common knowledge among voters. The core objective of this study is to determine the conditions under which Nash equilibria arise in the context of electoral competition with policy-dependent additive valence.

Suggested Citation

  • Mathieu Martin & Linus Thierry Nana Noumi & Zéphirin Nganmeni & Ashley Piggins, 2026. "On the Pure Strategy Nash Equilibrium in the Spatial Model with Dual Additive Valence," Thema Working Papers 2026-03, THEMA (Théorie Economique, Modélisation et Applications), CY Cergy-Paris University, ESSEC and CNRS.
    • Handle: RePEc:ema:worpap:2026-03
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://thema-cergy.eu/repec/pdf/2026-03.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mathieu Martin & Zéphirin Nganmeni & Craig Tovey, 2021. "Dominance in spatial voting with imprecise ideals," Post-Print hal-04257716, HAL.
    2. Owen, G & Shapley, L S, 1989. "Optimal Location of Candidates in Ideological Space," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 18(3), pages 339-356.
    3. Mathieu Martin & Zéphirin Nganmeni & Craig A. Tovey, 2016. "On the uniqueness of the yolk," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 47(3), pages 511-518, October.
    4. Norman Schofield, 1983. "Generic Instability of Majority Rule," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 50(4), pages 695-705.
    5. 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.
    6. Wooders, Myrna Holtz, 1983. "The epsilon core of a large replica game," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 11(3), pages 277-300, July.
    7. repec:cup:apsrev:v:57:y:1963:i:02:p:368-377_24 is not listed on IDEAS
    8. Mathieu Martin & Zéphirin Nganmeni & Craig A. Tovey, 2021. "Dominance in spatial voting with imprecise ideals," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 57(1), pages 181-195, July.
    9. McKelvey, Richard D., 1976. "Intransitivities in multidimensional voting models and some implications for agenda control," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 12(3), pages 472-482, June.
    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. Mathieu Martin & Linus Thierry Nana Noumi & Zéphirin Nganmeni & Ashley Piggins, 2026. "Back to Black: The Median Voter Revisited," Thema Working Papers 2026-04, THEMA (Théorie Economique, Modélisation et Applications), CY Cergy-Paris University, ESSEC and CNRS.
    2. Zéphirin Nganmeni & Craig Tovey, 2023. "The finagle point is close to the yolk," Post-Print hal-04257732, HAL.
    3. Mathieu Martin & Zéphirin Nganmeni & Ashley Piggins & Élise F. Tchouante, 2022. "Pure-strategy Nash equilibrium in the spatial model with valence: existence and characterization," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 190(3), pages 301-316, March.
    4. Knudson, Mathew, 2020. "Two candidate competition on differentiated policy sets," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 413-434.
    5. Tovey, Craig A., 2010. "The instability of instability of centered distributions," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 59(1), pages 53-73, January.
    6. De Donder, Philippe & Gallego, Maria, 2017. "Electoral Competition and Party Positioning," TSE Working Papers 17-760, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE).
    7. B. D. Bernheim & S. N. Slavov, 2009. "A Solution Concept for Majority Rule in Dynamic Settings," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 76(1), pages 33-62.
    8. Norman Schofield, 2007. "Modelling Politics," ICER Working Papers 33-2007, ICER - International Centre for Economic Research.
    9. Itai Sened, 1991. "Contemporary Theory of Institutions in Perspective," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 3(4), pages 379-402, October.
    10. Banks, Jeffrey S. & Duggan, John & Le Breton, Michel, 2006. "Social choice and electoral competition in the general spatial model," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 126(1), pages 194-234, January.
    11. John Jackson, 2014. "Location, location, location: the Davis-Hinich model of electoral competition," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 159(1), pages 197-218, April.
    12. Kenneth Shepsle, 1986. "The positive theory of legislative institutions: an enrichment of social choice and spatial models," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 50(1), pages 135-178, January.
    13. Kenneth Koford, 1982. "Centralized vote-trading," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 39(2), pages 245-268, January.
    14. Kalandrakis, Anastassios, 2004. "A three-player dynamic majoritarian bargaining game," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 116(2), pages 294-322, June.
    15. C.Y. Cyrus Chu & Meng-Yu Liang, 2022. "Why Are All Communist Countries Dictatorial?," IEAS Working Paper : academic research 22-A002, Institute of Economics, Academia Sinica, Taipei, Taiwan.
    16. 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.
    17. Banks, Jeffrey S. & Duggan, John & Le Breton, Michel, 2002. "Bounds for Mixed Strategy Equilibria and the Spatial Model of Elections," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 103(1), pages 88-105, March.
    18. P. Jean-Jacques Herings & Harold Houba, 2010. "The Condorcet Paradox Revisited," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 10-026/1, Tinbergen Institute.
    19. Matthew D. Mitchell, 2019. "Uncontestable favoritism," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 181(1), pages 167-190, October.
    20. Maria Gallego & Norman Schofield & Kevin McAlister & Jee Jeon, 2014. "The variable choice set logit model applied to the 2004 Canadian election," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 158(3), pages 427-463, March.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • D70 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - General
    • D71 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Social Choice; Clubs; Committees; Associations
    • D72 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Political Processes: Rent-seeking, Lobbying, Elections, Legislatures, and Voting Behavior

    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:ema:worpap:2026-03. 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: Lisa Collin (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/themafr.html .

    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.