Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-2n9c9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-15T12:02:27.216Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A Statistical Model for Multiparty Electoral Data

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 August 2014

Jonathan N. Katz and
Gary King
Jonathan N. Katz
Affiliation:
University of Chicago
Gary King
Affiliation:
Harvard University
Get accessRights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

We propose a comprehensive statistical model for analyzing multiparty, district-level elections. This model, which provides a tool for comparative politics research analogous to that which regression analysis provides in the American two-party context, can be used to explain or predict how geographic distributions of electoral results depend upon economic conditions, neighborhood ethnic compositions, campaign spending, and other features of the election campaign or aggregate areas. We also provide new graphical representations for data exploration, model evaluation, and substantive interpretation. We illustrate the use of this model by attempting to resolve a controversy over the size of and trend in the electoral advantage of incumbency in Britain. Contrary to previous analyses, all based on measures now known to be biased, we demonstrate that the advantage is small but meaningful, varies substantially across the parties, and is not growing. Finally, we show how to estimate the party from which each party's advantage is predominantly drawn.

Information

Type
Articles
Information
American Political Science Review , Volume 93 , Issue 1 , March 1999, pp. 15 - 32
Copyright
Copyright © American Political Science Association 1999

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.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

REFERENCES

Aitchison, J. 1986. The Statistical Analysis of Compositional Data. London: Chapman and Hall.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alvarez, R. Michael, and Nagler, Jonathan. N.d. “When Politics and Models Collide: Estimating Models of Multi-Party Elections.” American Journal of Political Science. Forthcoming.Google Scholar
Bellucci, Paolo. 1984. “The Effect of Aggregate Economic Conditions on the Political Preferences of the Italian Electorate, 1953–1979.” European Journal of Political Research 12(4):387–401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bellucci, Paolo. 1991. “Italian Economic Voting: A Deviant Case or Making a Better Theory?” In Economics and Politics: The Calculus of Support, ed. Norpoth, Helmut, Lewis-Beck, Michael S., and Lafay, Jean-Dominique. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. Pp. 63–81.Google Scholar
Butler, David E., and Kavanagh, Dennis. 1980. The British General Election of 1979. London: Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Butler, David E., and Stokes, Donald. 1969. Political Change in Britain: Forces Shaping Electoral Choice. New York: St. Martin's.Google Scholar
Cain, Bruce, Ferejohn, John, and Fiorina, Morris. 1987. The Personal Vote: Constituency Service and Electoral Independence. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cornford, J. R., Dorling, D. F. L., and Tether, B. S. 1995. “Historical Precedent and British Electoral Prospects.” Electoral Studies 14(2):123–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cox, Gary, and Katz, Jonathan N.. 1996. “Why Did the Incumbency Advantage in U.S. House Elections Grow?” American Journal of Political Science 40(2):478–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Curtice, John, and Steed, Michael. 1980. “An Analysis of Voting.” In The British General Election of 1979, ed. Butler, David E. and Kavanagh, Dennis. London: Macmillan. Pp. 390–431.Google Scholar
Curtice, John, and Steed, Michael. 1983. “The Voting Analyzed.” In The British General Election of 1983, ed. Butler, David E. and Kavanagh, Dennis. London: Macmillan. Pp. 333–73.Google Scholar
Domínguez, Jorge, and McCann, James. 1996. Democratizing Mexico: Public Opinion and Electoral Choices. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
Frey, Bruno, and Schneider, Fredrick. 1980. “Popularity Functions: The Case of the U.S. and West Germany. Models of Political Economy.” In Models of Political Economy, ed. Whiteley, Paul. London: Sage. Pp. 47–84.Google Scholar
Gelman, Andrew, Carlin, John B., Stern, Hal S., and Rubin, Donald B.. 1995. Bayesian Data Analysis. New York: Chapman and Hall.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gelman, Andrew, and King, Gary. 1990. “Estimating Incumbency Advantage without Bias.” American Journal of Political Science 34(11):1142–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gelman, Andrew, and King, Gary. 1991. “Systemic Consequences of Incumbency Advantage in the U.S. House.” American Journal of Political Science 35(02):110–38.Google Scholar
Gelman, Andrew, and King, Gary. 1994a. “Enhancing Democracy Through Legislative Redistricting.” American Political Science Review 88(09):541–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gelman, Andrew, and King, Gary. 1994b. “A Unified Method of Evaluating Electoral Systems and Redistricting Plans.” American Journal of Political Science 38(05):514–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goodhart, C. A. E., and Bhansali, R. J.. 1970. “Political Economy.” Political Studies 18(1):43–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Horowitz, Donald L. 1985. Ethnic Groups in Conflict. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Horowitz, Donald L. 1993. “Democracy in Divided Societies.” Journal of Democracy 4(4):18–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Host, Viggon, and Paldam, Martin. 1990. “An International Element in the Vote?” European Journal of Political Research 18(2):221–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huckfeldt, Robert, and Sprague, John. 1993. “Citizens, Contexts, and Politics.” In Political Science: The State of the Discipline, II, ed. Finifter, Ada. Washington, DC: American Political Science Association. Pp. 281–303.Google Scholar
Inoguchi, Takashi. 1980. “Economic Conditions and Mass Support in Japan, 1960–76.” In Models of Political Economy, ed. Whiteley, Paul. London: Sage. Pp. 121–51.Google Scholar
Jackman, Simon. 1996. “Bayesian Tools for Social Scientists.” Presented at the annual meetings of the American Political Science Association, San Francisco.Google Scholar
Johnson, Norman Lloyd, and Kotz, Samuel. 1972. Distributions in Statistics: Continuous Multivariate Distributions. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
King, Gary. 1989a. “Representation Through Legislative Redistricting: A Stochastic Model.” American Journal of Political Science 33(11):787–824.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
King, Gary. 1989b. Unifying Political Methodology: The Likelihood Theory of Statistical Inference. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
King, Gary. 1990. “Electoral Responsiveness and Partisan Bias in Multiparty Democracies.” Legislative Studies Quarterly 15(05):159–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
King, Gary. 1991. “Constituency Service and Incumbency Advantage.” British Journal of Political Science 21(01):119–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
King, Gary. 1997. A Solution to the Ecological Inference Problem: Reconstructing Individual Behavior from Aggregate Data. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
King, Gary, and Browning, Robert X.. 1987. “Democratic Representation and Partisan Bias in Congressional Elections.” American Political Science Review 81(12):1251–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
King, Gary, and Gelman, Andrew. 1991. “Systemic Consequences of Incumbency Advantage in the U.S. House.” American Journal of Political Science 35(02):110–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
King, Gary, Keohane, Robert O., and Verba, Sidney. 1994. Designing Social Inquiry: Scientific Inference in Qualitative Research. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
King, Gary, Tomz, Michael, and Wittenberg, Jason. 1998. “Making the Most of Statistical Analyses: Improving Interpretation and Presentation.” Presented at the annual meetings of the American Political Science Association, Washington, DC. http://gking.Harvard.edu/preprints.shtml (02 10, 1999).Google Scholar
Lewis-Beck, Michael S. 1988. Economics and Elections: The Major Western Democracies. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
Lewis-Beck, Michael S., and Bellucci, Paolo. 1982. “Economic Influences on Legislative Elections in Multi-Party Systems: France and Italy.” Political Behavior 4(1):93–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liu, Chuanhai. 1994. “Statistical Analysis Using the Multivariate t Distribution,” Ph.D. diss. Department of Statistics, Harvard University.Google Scholar
Miller, A. H., and Listhaug, Ola. 1985. “Economic Effects and the Voting in Norway.” In Economic Conditions and Electoral Outcomes, ed. Lewis-Beck, Michael S. and Eulau, Heinz. New York: Agathon. Pp. 125–43.Google Scholar
Norton, Philip, and Wood, David. 1990. “Constituency Service by Members of Parliament: Does It Contribute to a Personal Vote?” Parliamentary Affairs 43(04):196–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Offe, Claus. 1992. “Strong Causes, Weak Cures.” East European Constitutional Review 1(1):21–3.Google Scholar
Paldam, Martin. 1986. “The Distribution of Election Results and the Two Explanations of the Cost of Ruling.” Europaische Zeitschrift für Politische Okonomie/European Journal of Political Economy 2(1):5–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paldam, Martin. 1991. “How Robust Is the Vote Function?: A Study of Seventeen Nations over Four Decades.” In The Economics of Politics: The Calculus of Support, ed. Norpoth, Helmut, Lewis-Beck, Michael S., and Lafay, Jean-Dominique. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. Pp. 9–31.Google Scholar
Powell, G. B., and Whitten, G. D.. 1993. “A Cross-National Analysis of Economic Voting: Taking Account of the Political Context.” American Journal of Political Science 37(2):391–414.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Przeworski, Adam. 1991. Democracy and the Market. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Przeworski, Adam. 1996. “Public Support for Economic Reforms in Poland.” Comparative Political Studies 29(5):520–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rattinger, Hans. 1991. “Unemployment and Elections in West Germany.” In The Economics of Politics: The Calculus of Support, ed. Norpoth, Helmut, Lewis-Beck, Michael S., and Lafay, Jean-Dominique. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. Pp. 49–62.Google Scholar
Rosa, J.-J., and Amson, Daniel. 1976. “Conditions Economiques et Elections.” Revue Francaise de Science Politique 26(6):1101–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Slider, Darrell. 1994. “Political Tendencies in Russia's Regions: Evidence from the 1993 Parliamentary Elections.” Slavic Review 53(3):711–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stokes, S. C. 1996. “Economic Reform and Public Opinion in Peru, 1990–95.” Comparative Political Studies 29(5):544–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tanner, Martin A. 1997. Tools for Statistical Inference: Methods for the Exploration of Posterior Distributions and Likelihood Functions, 3d ed. New York: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
Tucker, Joshua. 1996. “The White Fear Hypothesis Meets Vladimir Zhironovsky: Ethnic Composition of Regions and Voting Patterns in the 1993 Russian Duma Elections.” Presented at the annual meetings of the Northeastern Political Science Association, Boston.Google Scholar
Upton, Graham J. G. 1989. “The Components of Voting Change in England, 1983–1987.” Electoral Studies 8(1):59–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Upton, Graham J. G. 1994. “Picturing the 1992 British General Election.” Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series A, General 157(Part 2):231–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
White, Stephen, Rose, Richard, and McAllister, Ian. 1997. How Russia Votes. Chatham, NJ: Chatham House.Google Scholar
Whiteley, Paul. 1980. “Politico-Econometric Estimation in Britain: An Alternative Explanation.” In Models of Political Economy, ed. Whiteley, Paul. London: Sage. Pp. 85–100.Google Scholar
Wood, David, and Norton, Philip. 1992. “Do Candidates Matter? Constituency-Specific Vote Changes for Incumbent MPs, 1983–1987.” Political Studies 40(06):227–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Submit a response

Comments

No Comments have been published for this article.