The premise of prospective voting is too demanding for most voters. In other words, there is the idea of utility maximization which is a key concept in rational choice theory, so the voter wants to maximize his utility and his utility is calculated according to the ratio between the cost and the benefit that can be obtained from the action, in this case going to vote (1) and going to vote for that party rather than this one (2). Political parties can make choices that are not choices to maximize the electorate, unlike spatial theories, where parties seek to maximize their short-term electoral support in an election. It is because we are rational, and if we are rational, rationality means maximizing our usefulness on the basis of the closeness we can have with a party. [10], The third model is called the economic model of the vote or the Rochester School of Economics, developed by Downs in the book An Economic Theory of Democracy published in 1957.[11]. it takes a political position that evokes the idea of symbolic politics in a more salient way. Several studies show that the impact of partisan identification varies greatly from one context to another. 102 Lake City, FL 32055 OR 17579 SW State Road 47 Fort White, FL 32038. There is the important opposition between an economic vote based on a choice, which is the idea that the voter makes a real choice based on a cost-benefit calculation, a choice that is rational in the end according to Weber's typology, while the psycho-sociological vote is rather based on a concept of loyalty that often makes the opposition between choice and loyalty. There is a whole branch of the electoral literature that emphasizes government action as an essential factor in explaining the vote, and there is a contrast between a prospective vote, which is voting according to what the parties say they will do during the election campaign, and a retrospective vote, which is voting in relation to what has been done, particularly by the government, which has attributed the successes or failures of a policy. While Downs said that there are parties that take positions on issues, the voter has difficulty with this inferring a position on a left-right axis. In Person: 971 W Duval St. Ste. The idea is that a party is ready to lose an election in order to give itself the means to win it later by giving itself time to form an electorate. For Iversen, distance is also important. Lazarsfeld's book created this research paradigm. These studies model individual utility from the election of a preferred party or candidate as decreasing as the alternative deviates from one's ideal point, but differ as to whether this loss should be modeled linearly or quadratically. On this basis, four types of voters can be identified in a simplified manner: It is possible to start from the assumption that the characteristics of these different voters are very different. 0000001124 00000 n A third criticism of the simple proximity model is the idea of the median voter, which is the idea that all voters group around the centre, so parties, based on this observation, will maximize their electoral support at the centre, and therefore if they are rational, parties will tend to be located more at the centre. How to assess the position of different parties and candidates. A set of theories has given some answers. Certain developments in the theory of the psycho-sociological model have in fact provided answers to these criticisms. 0000001213 00000 n Here we see the key factors, namely electoral choice and, at the centre, the identification variable for a party, which depends on two types of factors, namely primary socialization and group membership. The theoretical criticism consists in saying that in this psychosocial approach or in this vision that the psychosocial model has of the role of political issues, the evaluation of these issues is determined by political attitudes and partisan identification. At the aggregate level, the distribution of partisan identification in the electorate makes it possible to calculate the normal vote. If that is true, then if there are two parties that are equally close to our preferences, then we cannot decide. This is called the proximity model. Hinich and Munger take up the Downs idea but turn it around a bit. The individual is subjectivity at the centre of the analysis. Others have criticized this analogy between the economic market and the political market as being a bit simplistic, saying that, basically, the consequences of buying a consumer product have a certain number of consequences, but they are much more limited compared to what buying a vote can have in terms of choosing a party. Hinich and Munger say the opposite, saying that on the basis of their idea of the left-right positioning of the parties, they somehow deduce what will be or what is the position of these parties on the different issues. The law of curvilinear disparity takes up this distinction. Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire: Macmillan Education, 1987. There has also been the criticism of abstention as the result of rational calculation. More specifically, the costs that the voter has to take into account according to the different parties and candidates must be evaluated, which is the partisan differential, i.e. The idea is that each voter can be represented by a point in a hypothetical space and this space can be a space with N dimensions and each dimension represents an election campaign issue, so that this point reflects his or her ideal set of policies, i.e. The personality model highlights the importance of childhood experiences for political behavior and belief in adulthood; the sociological model highlights the importance of primary and interest . Professor Political Science Buena Vista University Two basic concerns: Turnout ("Who votes?") Key questions: What are the characteristics and attitudes of voters vs. nonvoters? These are voters who proceed by systematic voting. There is also the economic vote, which is the role of the economy. Ecological regression represents one extreme: the presumption that voting behavior changes systematically across groups but only changes randomly, if at all, within groups. For most theories, and in particular Matthews' Simple Directional Model theory, the neutral point determines direction. offers a behavior analysis of voting behavior. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 261(1), 194194. This article reviews the main theoretical models that explain the electoral behavior sociological model of voting behavior, psychosocial model of voting behavior and rational. We want to know how and why a voter will vote for a certain party. A distinction can be made between the simple proximity model, which is the Downs model, and the proximity model with Grofman discounting. By Web: Vote-By-Mail Web Request. There are also intermediate variables that relate to loyalties to a certain group or sense of belonging. Bakker, B. N., Hopmann, D. N., & Persson, M. (2014). Also called the Columbia model (after the university from whence came the researchers), the sociological model of voting behavior was constructed with the intention of studying the effect of media on voting choice. In Switzerland, the idea of an issue is particularly important because there is direct democracy, which is something that by definition is based on issues. For the sociological model we have talked about the index of political predisposition with the variables of socioeconomic, religious and spatial status. We can talk about two major theories or two major models or even three models. Property qualifications. These explanations are known as the Columbia Model and the Michigan Model, and describing these two . The Lazarsfeld model would link membership and voting. The importance of symbols lies in what arouses emotions. For Lazarsfeld, we think politically how we are socially, there is not really the idea of electoral choice. It is a rather descriptive model, at least in its early stages. These are models that should make us attentive to the different motivations that voters may or may not have to make in making an electoral choice. New York: Columbia University Press, 1948. On the other hand, women tend to have less stable partisan identification, they change more often too. This is linked to a decrease in class voting and a loss of traditional cleavages. Voters vote for the candidate or party closest to their own position which is the proximity model. It is a theory that is made in the interaction between supply and demand, that is, between parties offering something and voters asking for something. This is called prospective voting because voters will listen to what the parties have to say and evaluate on the basis of that, that is, looking ahead. it is an element of direction and not an element of distance or proximity that counts. It is a very detailed literature today. In this theory, we vote for specific issues that may be more or less concrete, more or less general, and which form the basis for explaining electoral behaviour. Merrill, Samuel, and Bernard Grofman. He wanted to see the role of the media in particular and also the role of opinion leaders and therefore, the influences that certain people can have in the electoral choice. It was this model that proposed that abstention can be the result of a purely rational calculation. xref Of course, there have been attempts to assess the explanatory power of directional models, but according to these researchers, these spatial models were designed to be purely theoretical in order to highlight on a purely theoretical level what motivations voters may have for their electoral choice. 0000007835 00000 n There are also studies that show that the more educated change less often from one party to another. The extent to which the usefulness of voters' choices varies from candidate to candidate, but also from voter to voter. A rather subjective and almost sentimental citizen is placed at the centre of the analysis. What determines direction? This model relies heavily on the ability of voters to assess and calculate their own interests and all the costs associated with the action of going to the polls. Maximizing utility is done in proximity to certain issues. There are different types of costs that this model considers and that need to be taken into account and in particular two types of costs which are the costs of going to vote (1) but above all, there are the costs of information (2) which are the costs of obtaining this information since in this model which postulates to choose a party on the basis of an evaluation of the different propositions of information which is available, given these basic postulates, the transparency of information and therefore the costs of information are crucial. There are a whole host of typologies in relation to issues, and we distinguish different types of issues such as position issues and issues that are more or less emotional. This is the basic motivation for the development of these directional models. For example, a strongly conservative voter who votes Democratic may vote Republican because he or she feels more in tune with the party. By finding something else, he shaped a dominant theory explaining the vote. Proximity means the closeness of the voter's interests to the political proposals that are made with the parties. An important factor is the role of political campaigns in influencing the vote. So all these elements help to explain the vote and must be taken into account in order to explain the vote. Basic Idea What you are vote choice ; Key foundational studies ; Lazarsfeld, Berelson, Gaudet (1944) The Peoples Choice Berelson, Lazarsfeld, McPhee (1954) Voting If we do not accept the idea that actors will vote according to their assessment of certain issues, to be more precise, according to their assessment of the position that the various parties have on certain issues, if we do not understand that, we cannot understand the spatial theories of voting either. What interests us is that the idea of issue voting is fundamental to spatial theories of voting. With regard to the question of how partisan identification develops, the psycho-sociological model emphasizes the role of the family and thus of primary socialization, but several critics have shown that secondary socialization also plays a role. The initial formation of this model was very deterministic in wanting to focus on the role of social inclusion while neglecting other aspects, even though today there is increasingly a kind of ecumenical attempt to have an explanation that takes into account different aspects. The choice of candidates is made both according to direction but also according to the intensity of positions on a given issue. Several studies have shown that the very fact of voting for a party contributes to the development of a certain identification for that party. does partisan identification work outside the United States? A unified theory of voting: directional and proximity spatial models. Psychological Models of American Voting Behavior* DAVID KNOKE, Indiana University ABSTRACT A path model of the presidential vote involving social variables, party identification, issue orientations, . Personality traits and party identification over time. 5. There is this curvilinear disparity because the three actors position themselves differently. In other words, social, spatial or group membership largely determines individual political actions. It rejects the notion that voting behavior is largely determined by class affiliation or class socialization. trailer It is quite interesting to see the bridges that can be built between theories that may seem different. endstream endobj 44 0 obj <> endobj 45 0 obj <> endobj 46 0 obj <>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>> endobj 47 0 obj <> endobj 48 0 obj <> endobj 49 0 obj <> endobj 50 0 obj <> endobj 51 0 obj <>stream Voting for a party and continuing to vote for such a party repeatedly makes it possible to develop an identification with that party which, in a way, then reinforces the electoral choice. This is the median voter theory. Due to the internet of behaviors (IoBe) information, user-specific recommendations can be customized in various fields such as trade, health, economy, law, and entertainment. Video transcript. Contenu disponible en Franais Contenido disponible en espaol Contenuto disponibile in italiano, The distinction between the three main explanatory models of voting is often found. and voters who choose to use euristic shortcuts to solve the information problem. His conclusion is that the vote is explained both by elements of leadership, partly by an element of proximity and distance, but also, for some parties, it must also be taken into account that there are parties that act according to a mobilization of the electorate according to the approach of Przeworski and Sprague. The psycho-sociological model is intended as a development that wants to respond to this criticism. The first answer is that basically, they vote according to their position, according to their social characteristics or according to their socialization, which refers to the sociological model. There is in fact the idea that the choices and preferences of voters in the centre will cause the parties, since they are aiming in this model, to try to maximize their electoral support. Fiorina proposed an alternative way to explain why voters vote for one party rather than another, or a different answer to how the position of different candidate parties can be assessed. The idea is that you stay loyal and you do "voice", that is, act to make things change. One must take into account the heterogeneity of the electorate and how different voters may have different motivations for choosing which party or candidate to vote for. As the authors of The American Voter put Linked to this, it is important to look at individual data empirically as well. In general, they are politically more sophisticated and better educated; those who rely on the opinion of the media and opinion leaders; that of the law of curvilinear disparity proposed by May; the directional model of Rabinowitz and Matthews; Przeworski and Sprague's mobilization of the electorate. Comparative Political Studies, 27(2), 155189. The idea is that it is in circles of interpersonal relations even if more modern theories of opinion leaders look at actors outside the personal circle. This paper examines two models used in survey research to explain voting behavior. Psychology and Voting Behavior In the same years that behaviorism (of various forms) came to dominate the For some, these are theories that offer reflections on the proper functioning of democracy, on presuppositions, the role of information or the role of citizens for the proper functioning of democracy and the role of parties. They find that conscientious and neurotic people tend not to identify with a political party. Sociological Model (Columbia Model) Social-Psychological Model (Michigan Model) Economic / Rational Choice Model (Rochester Model) 5 Sociological Model. As this is the first model that wanted to study empirically and test hypotheses on the basis of survey data, it was necessary to develop conceptual tools, in particular the political predisposition index, which focuses on three types of social affiliations that are fundamental in this perspective to explain electoral choices, namely social status, religion and place of residence. The cause-and-effect relationship is reversed, according to some who argue that this is a problem at the empirical level when we want to study the effect of partisan identification on electoral choice because there is a problem of endogeneity; we no longer know what explains what. So there are four main ways. %PDF-1.3 % In both The People's Choice (Lazarsfeld et al., 1944) and Voting (Berelson et al., 1954), the authors On that basis, voters calculate the utility income of the different parties and then they look at and evaluate the partisan differential. They find that partisan identification becomes more stable with age, so the older you get, the more partisan identification you have, so it's much easier to change when you're young. There are other models that try to relate the multiplicity of issues to an underlying ideological space, i.e., instead of looking at specific issues, everything is brought back to a left-right dimension as a shortcut, for example, and there are other theories that consider the degree of ambiguity and clarity of the candidates' positions. Fiorina proposed the question of how to evaluate the position of different parties and candidates: how can voters know what the position of different parties is during an election campaign? Numerous studies have found that voting behavior and political acts can be "contagious . Today, this may be less true, but until a certain point, there were relatively few empirical analyses based on the economic model of the vote. Then a second question was supposed to measure the strength of that identification with the question "do you consider yourself a Republican, strong, weak or leaning towards the Democratic Party? This jargon comes from this type of explanation. This is called retrospective voting, which means that we are not looking at what the parties said in their platforms, but rather at what the parties did before. From the point of view of parties and candidates, the economic model and in particular the model that was proposed by Downs in 1957 and which predicts a convergence of a party position towards the centre. Downs already put ideology at the centre of his explanation. For Lazarsfeld, "a person thinks politically as he or she is socially". This identification with a party is inherited from the family emphasizing the role of primary socialization, it is reinforced over time including a reinforcement that is given by the very fact of voting for that party. It has often been emphasized that this model and approach raises more questions than answers. The Neighborhood Model. Does partisan identification work outside the United States? $2.75. It is a theory that makes it possible to explain both the voting behaviour of voters and the organisational behaviour of political parties. Voters who rely on strong partisan identification do not need to go and do systematic voting or take one of the shortcuts. They try to elaborate a bit and find out empirically how this happens. The goal of this study was to evaluate the psychometric properties of the measurement of suicide severity based on the Columbia suicide severity rating scale. It is a model that is very close to data and practice and lends itself very easily to empirical testing through measures of partisan identification and different measures of socio-demographic factors among others. Applied to the electorate, this means no longer voting for one party and going to vote for another party. Even if there is still a significant effect of identification, there are other explanations and aspects to look for, particularly in terms of the issue vote and the assessments that different voters make of the issue vote. Print. This model predicts a convergence of party program positions around two distinct positions, there are two types of convergence. It is interesting to know that Lazarsfeld, when he began his studies with survey data, especially in an electoral district in New York State, was looking for something other than the role of social factors. We must assess the costs of going to the polls, of gathering the information needed to make a decision, but also the value of one's own participation, since the model is also supposed to explain voter turnout. The problem of information is crucial in the spatial theories of voting and who would need an answer to fully understand these different theories.