On Causality in the Study of Valence and Voting Behavior

An Introduction to the Symposium

Bibliographic Data

ID7352575
AuthorsChristopher Wlezien (0000-0002-0719-697X, corresponding author)
Year2015
Volume4
Issue1
Pages195-197
Publication date2015-12-15
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenuePolitical Science Research and Methods (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 2049-8470 • E-ISSN: 2049-8489
PublisherCambridge University Press (CUP) (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1017/psrm.2015.70
OpenAlexW2279689217
LanguageEN
References cited20

Evans and Chzhen (2016a) challenge Clarke et al.’s (Clarke et al. 2004; Clarke et al. 2009) “valence” model of voting behavior in British elections. Specifically, they take issue with results based on individual-level analyses relating subjective performance assessments to the (self-reported) vote measured concurrently. The argument is a basic one: there is reason to think that evaluations of performance are caused by—and not causes of—the vote. That this may be true is supported by a large and growing body of research in political science, much of which focuses on economic voting (e.g., Campbell et al. 1960; Kramer 1983; Wlezien et al. 1997; Bartels 2002; Anderson, Mendes and Tverdova 2004; Evans and Andersen 2006; Ladner and Wlezien 2007; Evans and Pickup 2010). Estimates of valence effects in Clarke et al.’s individual-level analyses thus may be correspondingly biased. It is an important issue for the study of valence and also other electoral research relying on perceptual and attitudinal predictors

Causality (physics · Economics · Physics · Political science · Politics · Positive economics · Valence (chemistry · Voting · Voting behavior · Electoral Systems and Political Participation · Fiscal Policies and Political Economy · Game Theory and Voting Systems · Law · Psychology · Social Psychology

Tools

Open DOISci-Hub