Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-68ccn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-12T08:37:15.590Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Why So Little Strategic Voting in India?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 April 2022

OLIVER HEATH Open the ORCID record for OLIVER HEATH [Opens in a new window]  and
ADAM ZIEGFELD Open the ORCID record for ADAM ZIEGFELD [Opens in a new window]
OLIVER HEATH*
Affiliation:
Royal Holloway, University of London, United Kingdom
ADAM ZIEGFELD*
Affiliation:
Temple University, United States
*
Oliver Heath, Professor, Department of Politics, International Relations and Philosophy, Royal Holloway, University of London, United Kingdom, Oliver.heath@rhul.ac.uk.
Adam Ziegfeld, Associate Professor, Department of Political Science, Temple University, United States, awz@temple.edu.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Strategic voting is thought to underlie Duverger’s Law and lead to two-party outcomes in single-member district plurality (SMDP) systems. We examine the extent of strategic voting in the world’s most populous democracy, India, where frequent exceptions to Duverger’s Law have long puzzled political scientists. Using an original voter survey from the 2017 Uttar Pradesh state election, we find extremely low rates of strategic voting. Why? We show that the vast majority of respondents believe that their preferred party is likely to win in their constituency. For most voters, their partisan preferences overwhelmingly predict their beliefs about which party will win. Their election forecasts correspond to objective electoral outcomes only with respect to parties that they like less.

Type
Letter
Information
American Political Science Review , Volume 116 , Issue 4 , November 2022 , pp. 1523 - 1529
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of the American Political Science Association

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.)

References

Abramson, Paul R., Aldrich, John H., Blais, André, Diamond, Matthew, Diskin, Abraham, Indridason, Indridi H., Lee, Daniel J., and Levine, Renan. 2010. “Comparing Strategic Voting under FPTP and PR.” Comparative Political Studies 43 (1): 61–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alvarez, R. Michael, Boehmke, Frederick J., and Nagler, Jonathan. 2006. “Strategic Voting in British Elections.” Electoral Studies 25 (1): 1–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alvarez, R. Michael, and Nagler, Jonathan. 1998. “When Politics and Models Collide: Estimating Models of Multiparty Elections.” American Journal of Political Science 42 (1): 55–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alvarez, R. Michael, and Nagler, Jonathan. 2000. “A New Approach for Modeling Strategic Voting in Multiparty Elections.” British Journal of Political Science 30 (1): 57–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blais, André. 2002. “Why Is There So Little Strategic Voting in Canadian Plurality Rule Elections?” Political Studies 50 (3): 445–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blais, André, and Bodet, Marc André. 2006. “How Do Voters Form Expectations about the Parties’ Chances of Winning the Election?” Social Science Quarterly 87 (3): 477–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blais, André, and Turgeon, Mathieu. 2004. “How Good Are Voters at Sorting out the Weakest Candidate in Their Constituency?” Electoral Studies 23 (3): 455–561.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blais, André, Nadeau, Richard, Gidengil, Elisabeth, and Nevitte, Neil. 2001. “Measuring Strategic Voting in Multiparty Plurality Elections.” Electoral Studies 20 (3): 343–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chandra, Kanchan. 2004. Why Ethnic Parties Succeed: Patronage and Ethnic Headcounts in India. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Choi, Jungug. 2009. “Strategic Voting in India: Its Extent and Determinants in the 2004 General Election.” Asian Survey 49 (4): 609–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cox, Gary W. 1997. Making Votes Count: Strategic Coordination in the World’s Electoral Systems. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Duverger, Maurice. 1954. Political Parties: Their Organization and Activity in the Modern State. London: Methuen.Google Scholar
Eggers, Andrew C., and Vivyan, Nick. 2020. “Who Votes More Strategically?” American Political Science Review 114 (2): 470–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fisher, Stephen D. 2004. “Definition and Measurement of Tactical Voting: The Role of Rational Choice.” British Journal of Political Science 34 (1): 152–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fisher, Stephen D., and Myatt, David P.. 2017. “Strategic Voting in Plurality Rule Elections.” Working Paper. http://dpmyatt.org/uploads/marginal-and-contention-2017-jul.pdf.Google Scholar
Fujiwara, Thomas. 2011. “A Regression Discontinuity Test of Strategic Voting and Duverger’s Law.” Quarterly Journal of Political Science 6 (3–4): 197–233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heath, Oliver, and Ziegfeld, Adam. 2018. “Electoral Volatility and Turnout: Party Entry and Exit in Indian Elections.” Journal of Politics 80 (2): 570–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heath, Oliver, and Ziegfeld, Adam. 2022. “Replication Data for: Why So Little Strategic Voting in India?” Harvard Dataverse. Dataset. https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/7JFVQI.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heath, Oliver, Verniers, Gilles, and Kumar, Sanjay. 2015. “Do Muslim Voters Prefer Muslim Candidates? Co-Religiosity and Voting Behaviour in India.” Electoral Studies 38 (June): 10–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kawai, Kei, and Watanabe, Yasutora. 2013. “Inferring Strategic Voting.” American Economic Review 103 (2): 624–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meffert, Michael F., Huber, Sascha, Gschwend, Thomas, and Pappi, Franz Urban. 2011. “More than Wishful Thinking: Causes and Consequences of Voters’ Electoral Expectations about Parties and Coalitions.” Electoral Studies 30 (4): 804–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Merolla, Jennifer L., and Stephenson, Laura B.. 2007. “Strategic Voting in Canada: A Cross Time Analysis.” Electoral Studies 26 (2): 235–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moser, Robert G., and Scheiner, Ethan. 2009. “Strategic Voting in Established and New Democracies: Ticket Splitting in Mixed-Member Electoral Systems.” Electoral Studies 28 (1): 51–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Raymond, Christopher D. 2018. “Do Third-Party Supporters Recognize Their Party Is out of the Running? Evidence from Canada.” Research and Politics 5 (3). https://doi.org/10.1177/2053168018797866.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rozenas, Arturas, and Sadanandan, Anoop. 2018. “Literacy, Information, and Party System Fragmentation in India.” Comparative Political Studies 51 (5): 555–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Uppal, Yogesh. 2009. “The Disadvantaged Incumbents: Estimating Incumbency Effects in Indian State Legislatures.” Public Choice 138 (1–2): 9–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhirnov, Andrei. 2019. “Decision Period and Duverger’s Psychological Effect in FPTP Elections: Evidence from India.” Electoral Studies 58 (April): 21–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ziegfeld, Adam. 2021. “What Accounts for Duverger’s Law? The Behavioral Mechanisms Underpinning Two-Party Convergence in India.” Electoral Studies 73 (October): article 102382.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Supplementary material: Link

Heath and Ziegfeld Dataset

Dataset

https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/7JFVQI
Link
Supplementary material: PDF

Heath and Ziegfeld supplementary material

Heath and Ziegfeld supplementary material
Download Heath and Ziegfeld supplementary material(PDF)
PDF 649.5 KB
Submit a response

Comments

No Comments have been published for this article.