Synergy in Spatial Models of Voting: How Critical Cases Show That Proximity, Direction and Discounting Are Friends, Not Foes

References

• Claassen, Ryan. 2007. “Ideology and Evaluation in an Experimental Setting: Comparing the Proximity and the Directional Models.” Political Research Quarterly 60 (2): 263–273. doi: 10.1177/1065912907302050
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Downs, Anthony. 1957. An Economic Theory of Democracy. New York: Harper.
   Google Scholar
• Franklin, Mark, and Till Weber. 2011. “How Elections Structure Political Preferences.” MPSA Annual Conference, Chicago, March–April 2011.
   Google Scholar
• Fuchs, Dieter, and Hans-Dieter Klingemann. 1989. “The Left-Right Schema.” In Continuities in Political Action, edited by M. Kent Jennings, Jan W. van Deth, Samuel H. Barnes, Dieter Fuchs, Felix J. Heunks, Ronald Inglehart, Max Kaase, Hans-Dieter Klingemann, and Jacques Thomassen, 203–234. New York: de Gruyter.
   Google Scholar
• Granberg, Donald, and Sören Holmberg. 1988. The Political System Matters. Social Psychology and Voting Behavior in Sweden and the United States. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Grofman, Bernard. 1985. “The Neglected Role of the Status Quo in Models of Issue Voting.” Journal of Politics 47 (1): 230–237. doi: 10.2307/2131073
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heckman, James, Hidehiko Ichimura, and Petra Todd. 1997. “Matching As An Econometric Evaluation Estimator: Evidence from Evaluating a Job Training Program.” Review of Economic Studies 64 (4): 605–654. doi: 10.2307/2971733
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Iversen, Torben. 1994. “Political Leadership and Representation in West European Democracies: A Test of Three Models of Voting.” American Journal of Political Science 38 (1): 45–74. doi: 10.2307/2111335
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kedar, Orit. 2005. “When Moderate Voters Prefer Extreme Parties: Policy Balancing in Parliamentary Elections.” American Political Science Review 99 (2): 185–199. doi: 10.1017/S0003055405051592
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Knutsen, Oddbjørn. 1995. “Value Orientations, Political Conflicts and Left-right Identification: A Comparative Study.” European Journal of Political Research 28 (1): 63–93. doi: 10.1111/j.1475-6765.1995.tb00487.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kroh, Martin. 2003. “Parties, Politicians, and Policies: Orientations of Vote Choice Across Voters and Contexts.” PhD diss., University of Amsterdam.
   Google Scholar
• Lacy, Dean, and Philip Paolino. 2010. “Testing Proximity versus Directional Voting Using Experiments.” Electoral Studies 29 (3): 460–471. doi: 10.1016/j.electstud.2010.04.008
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leuven, Edwin, and Barbara Sianesi. 2003. “ PSMATCH2: Stata Module to Perform Full Mahalanobis and Propensity Score Matching.” Accessed November 9, 2011. http://ideas.repec.org/c/boc/bocode/s432001.html.
   Google Scholar
• Lewis, Jeffrey, and Gary King. 1999. “No Evidence on Directional vs. Proximity Voting.” Political Analysis 8 (1): 21–33. doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.pan.a029803
   Google Scholar
• Listhaug, Ola, Stuart Elaine Macdonald, and George Rabinowitz. 1994. “Ideology and Party Support in Comparative Perspective.” European Journal of Political Research 25 (2): 111–149. doi: 10.1111/j.1475-6765.1994.tb00414.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Macdonald, Stuart Elaine, and George Rabinowitz. 1993. “Ideology and Candidate Evaluation.” Public Choice 76 (1–2): 59–78. doi: 10.1007/BF01049343
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Macdonald, Stuart Elaine, George Rabinowitz, and Ola Listhaug. 1998. “On Attempting to Rehabilitate the Proximity Model: Sometimes the Patient Just Can't Be Helped.” Journal of Politics 60 (3): 653–690. doi: 10.2307/2647643
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Macdonald, Stuart Elaine, George Rabinowitz, and Ola Listhaug. 2007. “Simulating Models of Issue Voting.” Political Analysis 15 (4): 406–427. doi: 10.1093/pan/mpm016
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meguid, Bonnie. 2008. Party Competition between Unequals: Strategies and Electoral Fortunes in Western Europe. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Merrill III, Samuel, and Bernard Grofman. 1997. “Directional and Proximity Models of Voter Utility and Choice: A New Synthesis and an Illustrative Test of Competing Models.” Journal of Theoretical Politics 9 (1): 25–48. doi: 10.1177/0951692897009001004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Merrill III, Samuel, and Bernard Grofman. 1999. A Unified Theory of Voting. Directional and Proximity Spatial Models. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Miller, Warren, Roy Pierce, Jacques Thomassen, Richard Herrera, Sören Holmberg, Peter Esaiasson, and Bernhard Wessels. 1999. Policy Representation in Western Democracies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Pardos-Prado, Sergi, and Elias Dinas. 2010. “Systemic Polarisation and Spatial Voting.” European Journal of Political Research 49 (6): 759–786. doi: 10.1111/j.1475-6765.2010.01918.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rabinowitz, George, and Stuart Elaine Macdonald. 1989. “A Directional Theory of Issue Voting.” American Political Science Review 83 (1): 93–121. doi: 10.2307/1956436
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rosenbaum, Paul, and Donald Rubin. 1983. “The Central Role of the Propensity Score in Observational Studies for Causal Effects.” Biometrika 70 (1): 41–55. doi: 10.1093/biomet/70.1.41
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schmitt, Hermann, and Jacques Thomassen, eds. 1999. Political Representation and Legitimacy in the European Union. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Spencer-Brown, George. 1969. Laws of Form. London: Allen & Unwin.
   Google Scholar
• Tomz, Michael, and Robert Van Houweling. 2008. “Candidate Positioning and Voter Choice.” American Political Science Review 102 (3): 303–318. doi: 10.1017/S0003055408080301
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van der Brug, Wouter, Mark Franklin, and Gábor Tóka. 2008. “One Electorate or Many? Differences in Party Preference Formation between New and Established European Democracies.” Electoral Studies 27 (4): 589–600. doi: 10.1016/j.electstud.2007.12.010
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van der Brug, Wouter, Cees van der Eijk, and Mark Franklin. 2007. “EU Support and Party Choice.” In European Elections and Domestic Politics, edited by Wouter van der Brug and Cees van der Eijk, 168–188. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press.
   Google Scholar
• Van der Eijk, Cees, and Michael Marsh. 2007. “A Comparison of the Validity of Non-ipsative Measures of Party Support.” APSA Annual Meeting, Chicago, August–September.
   Google Scholar
• Van der Eijk, Cees, Wouter van der Brug, Martin Kroh, and Mark Franklin. 2006. “Rethinking the Dependent Variable in Voting Behavior: On the Measurement and Analysis of Electoral Utilities.” Electoral Studies 25 (3): 424–447. doi: 10.1016/j.electstud.2005.06.012
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Westholm, Anders. 1997. “Distance versus Direction: The Illusory Defeat of the Proximity Theory of Electoral Choice.” American Political Science Review 91 (4): 865–883. doi: 10.2307/2952170
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar