Issues, the Spatial Theory of Voting, and British General Elections: A Comparison of Proximity and Directional Models

Sungdai Cho and James W Endersby

Public Choice, 2003, vol. 114, issue 3-4, 275-93

Abstract: Competing spatial models of voter choice are compared in the context of parliamentary representatives selected through single-member district, plurality elections where party platforms are emphasized over individual candidates. Respondents of the 1987, 1992, and 1997 British general election surveys rate political parties on a series of issue scales. Ordered logistic regressions of party evaluations under proximity, directional, and mixed models reveal that the classic spatial model and the directional model perform equally well. Differences center on perceptions of the status quo, as voters appear to evaluate the incumbent party (here, the Conservatives) slightly differently than minority parties (Labour and the Liberal Democrats). The proximity model works better for voter evaluations of governing parties while the directional model works well for opposition parties. Copyright 2003 by Kluwer Academic Publishers

Date: 2003
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (6)

Downloads: (external link)
http://journals.kluweronline.com/issn/0048-5829/contents link to full text (text/html)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:kap:pubcho:v:114:y:2003:i:3-4:p:275-93

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.springer. ... ce/journal/11127/PS2

Access Statistics for this article

Public Choice is currently edited by WIlliam F. Shughart II

More articles in Public Choice from Springer
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla () and Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing ().