Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dlnhk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-30T19:16:57.440Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Accounting for Voter Heterogeneity within and across Districts with a Factor-Analytic Voter-Choice Model

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 January 2017

Wagner A. Kamakura  and
José Afonso Mazzon
Wagner A. Kamakura
Affiliation:
Fuqua Graduate School of Business, Duke University, One Towerview Road, Durham, NC 27708. e-mail: [email protected] (corresponding author)
José Afonso Mazzon
Affiliation:
Faculdade de Administração e Economia, University of São Paulo, Ave. Prof. Luciano Gualberto, 908, CEP 0558-900 São Paulo, Brazil. e-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In this study, we propose a model of individual voter behavior that can be applied to aggregate data at the district (or precinct) levels while accounting for differences in political preferences across districts and across voters within each district. Our model produces a mapping of the competing candidates and electoral districts on a latent “issues” space that describes how political preferences in each district deviate from the average voter and how each candidate caters to average voter preferences within each district. We formulate our model as a random-coefficients nested logit model in which the voter first evaluates the candidates to decide whether or not to cast his or her vote, and then chooses the candidate who provides him or her with the highest value. Because we allow the random coefficient to vary not only across districts but also across unobservable voters within each district, the model avoids the Independence of Irrelevant Alternatives Assumption both across districts and within each district, thereby accounting for the cannibalization of votes among similar candidates within and across voting districts. We illustrate our proposed model by calibrating it to the actual voting data from the first stage of a two-stage state governor election in the Brazilian state of Santa Catarina, and then using the estimates to predict the final outcome of the second stage.

Type
Research Article
Information
Political Analysis , Volume 15 , Issue 1 , Winter 2007 , pp. 67 - 84
Copyright
Copyright © The Author 2006. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society for Political Methodology 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Achen, Christopher, and Phillips Shively, W. 1995. Cross level inference. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Black, D. 1958. The theory of committees and elections. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Cho, S., and Endersby, J. W. 2003. Issues, the spatial theory of voting, and British general elections: A comparison of proximity and directional models. Public Choice 114: 275–93.Google Scholar
Coughlin, P. J. 1992. Probabilistic voting theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coughlin, P. J., and Nitzan, S. 1981. Electoral outcomes with probabilistic voting and Nash social welfare maxima. Journal of Public Economics 15: 113–22.Google Scholar
Dow, J. K., and Endersby, J. W. 2004. Multinomial probit and multinomial logit: A comparison of choice models for voting research. Electoral Studies 23: 107–22.Google Scholar
Downs, A. 1957. An economic theory of democracy. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
Elrod, T. 1988. Choice map: Inferring a product-market map from panel data. Marketing Science 7: 21–40.Google Scholar
Enelow, J. M., and Hinich, M. J. 1984. The spatial theory of voting. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Glasgow, Garret. 2001. Mixed logit models for multiparty elections. Political Analysis 9(1): 116–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gourieroux, C., and Monfort, A. 1997. Simulation based econometric methods. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Honacker, James, Katz, Jonathan N., and King, Gary. 2002. A fast, easy and efficient estimator for multiparty electoral data. Political Analysis 10(1): 84–100.Google Scholar
Jackson, John E. 2002. A seemingly unrelated regression model for analyzing multiparty elections. Political Analysis 10(1): 49–65.Google Scholar
Katz, Jonathan N., and King, Gary. 1999. A statistical model for multiparty electoral data. American Political Science Review 93(1): 15–32.Google Scholar
MacDonald, S. E., Rabinowitz, G., and Listhaug, O. 2001. Sophistry versus science: On further efforts to rehabilitate the proximity model. Journal of Politics 63: 482–500.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McFadden, Daniel. 1974. Conditional logit analysis of qualitative choice behavior. In Frontier in Econometrics, ed. Zarembka, P., 105–42. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Mikhailov, Nikolai, Niemi, Richard G., and Weimer, David L. 2002. Application of Theil group logit methods to district level vote shares: Tests of prospective and retrospective voting in the 1991, 1993, and 1997 Polish elections. Electoral Studies 21: 631–48.Google Scholar
Quinn, Kevin M. 2004. Bayesian factor analysis for mixed ordinal and continuous responses. Political Analysis 12(4): 338–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tomz, Michael, Tucker, Joshua A., and Wittenberg, Jason. 2002. An easy and accurate regression model for multiparty electoral data. Political Analysis 10: 66–83.Google Scholar
Train, Kenneth E. 2003. Discrete choice methods with simulation. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zeng, L. 2000. A heteroscedastic generalized extreme value discrete choice model. Sociological, Methods & Research 29(1): 119–45.Google Scholar
Wedel, Michel, and Kamakura, Wagner A. 2001. Factor analysis with mixed observed and latent variables in the exponential family. Psychometrika 66(4): 515–30.Google Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Kamakura and Mazzon Supplementary Material

Supplementary Material

Download Kamakura and Mazzon Supplementary Material(File)
File 30.7 KB
Supplementary material: File

Kamakura and Mazzon Supplementary Material

Supplementary Material

Download Kamakura and Mazzon Supplementary Material(File)
File 41 KB