Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-fvjsw Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-12T07:35:13.085Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A Downsian Spatial Model with Party Activism

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 August 2014

John H. Aldrich
John H. Aldrich*
Affiliation:
University of Minnesota
Get accessRights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

A unidimensional spatial model is proposed in this article. Although its formal structure parallels the spatial model of electoral competition, this model examines the decisions of individuals as they choose whether or not to become activists in one of two political parties. An individual “calculus of participation” is developed that is similar to the spatial interpretation of the “calculus of voting.” This calculus is then generalized by examining conditions that may hold for aggregate activism probabilities, and the relationship between the two forms is investigated. Some results are then presented which concern the distributions of activists in the two parties. These results in general conform to the existence of “party cleavages,” in which there are two stable (equilibrium) distributions of activists, such that the two parties' activists are relatively cohesive internally and relatively distinctive externally. Finally, some suggestions are offered about how this model can be combined with the spatial model of candidate competition to provide a more complete model of elections.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
American Political Science Review , Volume 77 , Issue 4 , December 1983, pp. 974 - 990
Copyright
Copyright © American Political Science Association 1983

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

Aldrich, J. H. A spatial model with party activists: implications for electoral dynamics. Public Choice, in press.Google Scholar
Aldrich, J. H., & McGinnis, M. An n-dimensional generalization of a Downsian spatial model with party activism. Mimeo, Political Science Department, University of Minnesota, 1983.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aranson, P. H., & Ordeshook, P. C.Spatial strategies for sequential elections. In Niemi, R. G. & Weisberg, H. F. (Eds.). Probability models of collective decision making. Columbus, Ohio: Charles E. Merrill, 1972.Google Scholar
Clark, P. B., & Wilson, J. Q.Incentive systems: a theory of organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1961, 68, 129–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coleman, J. S.The positions of political parties in elections. In Niemi, R. G. & Weisberg, H. F. (Eds.), Probability models of collective decision making. Columbus, Ohio: Charles E. Merrill, 1972.Google Scholar
Davis, O. A., & Hinich, M.A mathematical model of policy formation in a democratic society. In Bernd, J. L. (Ed.). Mathematical applications in political science, II. Dallas: Southern Methodist University Press, 1966.Google Scholar
Davis, O. A., Hinich, M., & Ordeshook, P.An expository development of a mathematical model of the electoral process. American Political Science Review, 1970, 64, 426–448.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Downs, A.An economic theory of democracy. New York: Harper & Row, 1957.Google Scholar
Ferejohn, J. A., & Fiorina, M. P.The paradox of not voting: a decision theoretic analysis. American Political Science Review, 1974, 68, 525–536.Google Scholar
Kramer, G. H.A dynamical model of political equilibrium. Journal of Economic Theory, 1977, 16, 310–334.Google Scholar
McCloskey, H., Hoffmann, P. J., & O'Hara, R.Issue conflict and consensus among party leaders and followers. American Political Science Review, 1960, 54, 406–427.Google Scholar
McKelvey, R. D.Policy related voting and electoral equilibrium. Econometrica, 1975, 43, 815–843.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Page, B. I.Choices and echoes in presidential elections: rational man and electoral democracy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1978.Google Scholar
Riker W. H., & Ordeshook, P. C.A theory of the calculus of voting. American Political Science Review, 1968, 63, 25–43.Google Scholar
Riker, W. H., & Ordesook, P.An introduction to positive political theory. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1973.Google Scholar
Wittman, D.Candidate motivation: a synthesis of alternative theories. American Political Science Review, 1983, 77, 142–157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Submit a response

Comments

No Comments have been published for this article.