IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Voters' preferences and electoral systems: The EuroVotePlus experiment in Italy


  • Luca, Bettarelli
  • Giovanna, Iannantuoni
  • Elena, Manzoni
  • Francesca, Rossi


Motivated by the need of understanding voting behavior under different electoral rules, Laslier et al. (2015) have conducted an online experiment in several European countries during the three weeks before the 2014 elections for the European Parliament, the EuroVotePlus experiment. This paper focuses on the Italian data . We first show that the behavior of Italian respondents is consistent with the empirical findings at the European level. Then, we exploit the change from open list to closed list elections implemented in Italy in 1993 to investigate whether and how preferences over institutions are affected by experience. We find that respondents who voted using the open list system in Italy are more likely to prefer closed list systems, and that the effect is stronger the higher the number of open list elections that the respondents have faced.

Suggested Citation

  • Luca, Bettarelli & Giovanna, Iannantuoni & Elena, Manzoni & Francesca, Rossi, 2016. "Voters' preferences and electoral systems: The EuroVotePlus experiment in Italy," Working Papers 338, University of Milano-Bicocca, Department of Economics, revised 19 May 2016.
  • Handle: RePEc:mib:wpaper:338

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. André Blais & Jean-François Laslier & François Poinas & Karine Straeten, 2015. "Citizens’ preferences about voting rules: self-interest, ideology, and sincerity," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 164(3), pages 423-442, September.
    2. Golden, Miriam A., 2003. "Electoral Connections: The Effects of the Personal Vote on Political Patronage, Bureaucracy and Legislation in Postwar Italy," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 33(02), pages 189-212, April.
    3. 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.
    4. John Aldrich & Jason Reifler & Michael Munger, 2014. "Sophisticated and myopic? Citizen preferences for Electoral College reform," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 158(3), pages 541-558, March.
    5. Damien Bol & Philipp Harfst & André Blais & Sona N Golder & Jean-François Laslier & Laura B Stephenson & Karine Van der Straeten, 2016. "Addressing Europe’s democratic deficit: An experimental evaluation of the pan-European district proposal," European Union Politics, , vol. 17(4), pages 525-545, December.
    6. Jean-François Laslier & André Blais & Damien Bol & Sona N Golder & Philipp Harfst & Laura B Stephenson & Karine Van der Straeten, 2015. "The EuroVotePlus experiment," European Union Politics, , vol. 16(4), pages 601-615, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item


    European Parliament Election; Open list; Closed list; Voting rules;

    JEL classification:

    • D7 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making
    • C9 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:


    Access and download statistics


    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:mib:wpaper:338. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Matteo Pelagatti). General contact details of provider: .

    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 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.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.