Issue Scales, Information Cues, and the Proximity and Directional Models of Voter Choice
One of the most important questions in the study of democratic politics centers on how citizens consider issues and candidate positions when choosing whom to support in an election. The proximity and directional theories make fundamentally different predictions about voter behavior and imply differe...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Political research quarterly 2018-12, Vol.71 (4), p.772-787 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 787 |
---|---|
container_issue | 4 |
container_start_page | 772 |
container_title | Political research quarterly |
container_volume | 71 |
creator | Kropko, Jonathan Banda, Kevin K. |
description | One of the most important questions in the study of democratic politics centers on how citizens consider issues and candidate positions when choosing whom to support in an election. The proximity and directional theories make fundamentally different predictions about voter behavior and imply different optimal strategies for candidates, but a longstanding literature to empirically adjudicate between the theories has yielded mixed results. We use a survey experiment to show that the way that candidates' issue positions are described can cue citizens to choose a candidate that is preferred under the expectations of either the proximity or the directional theory. We find that directional voting is more likely when the issue scale is understood to represent degrees of intensity with which either the liberal or the conservative side of the issue is expressed and that proximity voting is more likely when an issue scale is understood to be a range of policies. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1177/1065912918760729 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>jstor_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2124342472</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><jstor_id>26600627</jstor_id><sage_id>10.1177_1065912918760729</sage_id><sourcerecordid>26600627</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c331t-ca7af83c8189f195dfb509a7bdfb038bb73f44f76ad2bd30857c7ed0f595cc7a3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kEtLAzEUhYMoWKt7N0LAraN5zSRZyvgqVBR80N2QySR2yrSpSQr235txRMGFq3s557uHwwXgGKNzjDm_wKjIJSYSC14gTuQOGGFJRUY4m-2mPdlZ7--DgxAWCGGCWT4Cs0kIGwOftOpMOIOTlXV-qWLrVrDc9IpaNTDODXz07qNdtnH7pVy13uieUh28d43pAnQWvrpoPCznrtXmEOxZ1QVz9D3H4OXm-rm8y6YPt5PycpppSnHMtOLKCqoFFtJimTe2zpFUvE4LoqKuObWMWV6ohtQNRSLnmpsG2VzmWnNFx-B0yF17954ax2rhNj71ChXBhFFGGCeJQgOlvQvBG1utfbtUflthVPX_q_7-L51kw0lQb-Y39B_-ZOAXITr_k0-KAqGCcPoJ6y54_w</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2124342472</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Issue Scales, Information Cues, and the Proximity and Directional Models of Voter Choice</title><source>Access via SAGE</source><source>PAIS Index</source><source>Worldwide Political Science Abstracts</source><source>Jstor Complete Legacy</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>Kropko, Jonathan ; Banda, Kevin K.</creator><creatorcontrib>Kropko, Jonathan ; Banda, Kevin K.</creatorcontrib><description>One of the most important questions in the study of democratic politics centers on how citizens consider issues and candidate positions when choosing whom to support in an election. The proximity and directional theories make fundamentally different predictions about voter behavior and imply different optimal strategies for candidates, but a longstanding literature to empirically adjudicate between the theories has yielded mixed results. We use a survey experiment to show that the way that candidates' issue positions are described can cue citizens to choose a candidate that is preferred under the expectations of either the proximity or the directional theory. We find that directional voting is more likely when the issue scale is understood to represent degrees of intensity with which either the liberal or the conservative side of the issue is expressed and that proximity voting is more likely when an issue scale is understood to be a range of policies.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1065-9129</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1938-274X</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1177/1065912918760729</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Los Angeles, CA: SAGE Publishing</publisher><subject>Candidates ; Citizens ; Congressional elections ; Cues ; Election results ; Elections ; Expectations ; Health care policy ; Ideology ; Political campaigns ; Politics ; Primaries & caucuses ; Proximity ; Theory ; Voter behavior ; Voting</subject><ispartof>Political research quarterly, 2018-12, Vol.71 (4), p.772-787</ispartof><rights>Copyright © 2018 The University of Utah</rights><rights>2018 University of Utah</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c331t-ca7af83c8189f195dfb509a7bdfb038bb73f44f76ad2bd30857c7ed0f595cc7a3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c331t-ca7af83c8189f195dfb509a7bdfb038bb73f44f76ad2bd30857c7ed0f595cc7a3</cites><orcidid>0000-0003-4504-9302</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/26600627$$EPDF$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/26600627$$EHTML$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,803,12845,21819,27866,27924,27925,43621,43622,58017,58250</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Kropko, Jonathan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Banda, Kevin K.</creatorcontrib><title>Issue Scales, Information Cues, and the Proximity and Directional Models of Voter Choice</title><title>Political research quarterly</title><description>One of the most important questions in the study of democratic politics centers on how citizens consider issues and candidate positions when choosing whom to support in an election. The proximity and directional theories make fundamentally different predictions about voter behavior and imply different optimal strategies for candidates, but a longstanding literature to empirically adjudicate between the theories has yielded mixed results. We use a survey experiment to show that the way that candidates' issue positions are described can cue citizens to choose a candidate that is preferred under the expectations of either the proximity or the directional theory. We find that directional voting is more likely when the issue scale is understood to represent degrees of intensity with which either the liberal or the conservative side of the issue is expressed and that proximity voting is more likely when an issue scale is understood to be a range of policies.</description><subject>Candidates</subject><subject>Citizens</subject><subject>Congressional elections</subject><subject>Cues</subject><subject>Election results</subject><subject>Elections</subject><subject>Expectations</subject><subject>Health care policy</subject><subject>Ideology</subject><subject>Political campaigns</subject><subject>Politics</subject><subject>Primaries & caucuses</subject><subject>Proximity</subject><subject>Theory</subject><subject>Voter behavior</subject><subject>Voting</subject><issn>1065-9129</issn><issn>1938-274X</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2018</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>7TQ</sourceid><sourceid>7UB</sourceid><sourceid>8G5</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><sourceid>GUQSH</sourceid><sourceid>M2O</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kEtLAzEUhYMoWKt7N0LAraN5zSRZyvgqVBR80N2QySR2yrSpSQr235txRMGFq3s557uHwwXgGKNzjDm_wKjIJSYSC14gTuQOGGFJRUY4m-2mPdlZ7--DgxAWCGGCWT4Cs0kIGwOftOpMOIOTlXV-qWLrVrDc9IpaNTDODXz07qNdtnH7pVy13uieUh28d43pAnQWvrpoPCznrtXmEOxZ1QVz9D3H4OXm-rm8y6YPt5PycpppSnHMtOLKCqoFFtJimTe2zpFUvE4LoqKuObWMWV6ohtQNRSLnmpsG2VzmWnNFx-B0yF17954ax2rhNj71ChXBhFFGGCeJQgOlvQvBG1utfbtUflthVPX_q_7-L51kw0lQb-Y39B_-ZOAXITr_k0-KAqGCcPoJ6y54_w</recordid><startdate>20181201</startdate><enddate>20181201</enddate><creator>Kropko, Jonathan</creator><creator>Banda, Kevin K.</creator><general>SAGE Publishing</general><general>SAGE Publications</general><general>SAGE PUBLICATIONS, INC</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>0-V</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7TQ</scope><scope>7UB</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88F</scope><scope>88J</scope><scope>8BJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ALSLI</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DHY</scope><scope>DON</scope><scope>DPSOV</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FQK</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>JBE</scope><scope>KC-</scope><scope>M1Q</scope><scope>M2L</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>M2R</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>S0X</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4504-9302</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20181201</creationdate><title>Issue Scales, Information Cues, and the Proximity and Directional Models of Voter Choice</title><author>Kropko, Jonathan ; Banda, Kevin K.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c331t-ca7af83c8189f195dfb509a7bdfb038bb73f44f76ad2bd30857c7ed0f595cc7a3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2018</creationdate><topic>Candidates</topic><topic>Citizens</topic><topic>Congressional elections</topic><topic>Cues</topic><topic>Election results</topic><topic>Elections</topic><topic>Expectations</topic><topic>Health care policy</topic><topic>Ideology</topic><topic>Political campaigns</topic><topic>Politics</topic><topic>Primaries & caucuses</topic><topic>Proximity</topic><topic>Theory</topic><topic>Voter behavior</topic><topic>Voting</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Kropko, Jonathan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Banda, Kevin K.</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Social Sciences Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>PAIS Index</collection><collection>Worldwide Political Science Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Military Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Social Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Social Science Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>eLibrary</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>PAIS International</collection><collection>PAIS International (Ovid)</collection><collection>Politics Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>ProQuest Politics Collection</collection><collection>Military Database</collection><collection>Political Science Database</collection><collection>Research Library</collection><collection>Social Science Database</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>SIRS Editorial</collection><jtitle>Political research quarterly</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Kropko, Jonathan</au><au>Banda, Kevin K.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Issue Scales, Information Cues, and the Proximity and Directional Models of Voter Choice</atitle><jtitle>Political research quarterly</jtitle><date>2018-12-01</date><risdate>2018</risdate><volume>71</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>772</spage><epage>787</epage><pages>772-787</pages><issn>1065-9129</issn><eissn>1938-274X</eissn><abstract>One of the most important questions in the study of democratic politics centers on how citizens consider issues and candidate positions when choosing whom to support in an election. The proximity and directional theories make fundamentally different predictions about voter behavior and imply different optimal strategies for candidates, but a longstanding literature to empirically adjudicate between the theories has yielded mixed results. We use a survey experiment to show that the way that candidates' issue positions are described can cue citizens to choose a candidate that is preferred under the expectations of either the proximity or the directional theory. We find that directional voting is more likely when the issue scale is understood to represent degrees of intensity with which either the liberal or the conservative side of the issue is expressed and that proximity voting is more likely when an issue scale is understood to be a range of policies.</abstract><cop>Los Angeles, CA</cop><pub>SAGE Publishing</pub><doi>10.1177/1065912918760729</doi><tpages>16</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4504-9302</orcidid></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1065-9129 |
ispartof | Political research quarterly, 2018-12, Vol.71 (4), p.772-787 |
issn | 1065-9129 1938-274X |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_2124342472 |
source | Access via SAGE; PAIS Index; Worldwide Political Science Abstracts; Jstor Complete Legacy; Alma/SFX Local Collection |
subjects | Candidates Citizens Congressional elections Cues Election results Elections Expectations Health care policy Ideology Political campaigns Politics Primaries & caucuses Proximity Theory Voter behavior Voting |
title | Issue Scales, Information Cues, and the Proximity and Directional Models of Voter Choice |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-28T02%3A56%3A45IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-jstor_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Issue%20Scales,%20Information%20Cues,%20and%20the%20Proximity%20and%20Directional%20Models%20of%20Voter%20Choice&rft.jtitle=Political%20research%20quarterly&rft.au=Kropko,%20Jonathan&rft.date=2018-12-01&rft.volume=71&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=772&rft.epage=787&rft.pages=772-787&rft.issn=1065-9129&rft.eissn=1938-274X&rft_id=info:doi/10.1177/1065912918760729&rft_dat=%3Cjstor_proqu%3E26600627%3C/jstor_proqu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2124342472&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_jstor_id=26600627&rft_sage_id=10.1177_1065912918760729&rfr_iscdi=true |