Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-xfwgj Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-22T19:09:03.129Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

References

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 December 2009

Wouter van der Brug
Affiliation:
Universiteit van Amsterdam
Cees van der EijK
Affiliation:
University of Nottingham
Mark Franklin
Affiliation:
European University Institute, Florence
Get access

Summary

Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Chapter
Information
The Economy and the Vote
Economic Conditions and Elections in Fifteen Countries
, pp. 219 - 228
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2007

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

Alvarez, R. M., and Nagler, J.. 1998. “When Politics and Models Collide: Estimating Models of Multiparty Elections,” American Journal of Political Science 42: 55–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alvarez, R. M., and Nagler, J.. 2000. “A New Approach for Modelling Strategic Voting in Multiparty Elections,” British Journal of Political Science 30: 57–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anderson, C. 1995. Blaming the Government: Citizens and the Economy in Five European Democracies. Armonk, NY: M. E. Sharpe.Google Scholar
Anker, H. 1992. Normal Vote Analysis. Amsterdam: Het Spinhuis.Google Scholar
Anker, H., and E. Oppenhuis. 1995. Dutch Parliamentary Election Study 1994. Amsterdam: Steinmetz Archive/SKON (the ICPSR version of this dataset was published in 1997, Study Nr. 6740).
Ansolabehere, S., and Iyengar, S.. 1995. Going Negative: How Political Advertisements Shrink and Polarize the Electorate. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Ark, B., and Haan, J.. 2000. “The Delta-Model Revisited: Recent Trends in the Structural Performance of the Dutch Economy,” International Review of Applied Economics 14: 307–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barry, B. M. 1970. Sociologists, Economists and Democracy. London: Collier-Macmillan.Google Scholar
Bartels, L. M. 2002. “Beyond the Running Tally: Partisan Bias in Political Perceptions,” Political Behavior 24: 117–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bartle, J. 1997. “Political Awareness and Heterogeneity in Models of Voting: Some Evidence from the Recent British Election Studies,” in British Elections and Parties Review 7, PattieDenver, C. D., Fisher, J., and Ludlam, S. (eds.). London: Frank Cass, pp. 1–22.Google Scholar
Beck, N., and Katz, J.. 1995. “What to Do (and Not to Do) with Time-Series-Cross-Section Data in Comparative Politics,” American Political Science Review 89: 634–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ben-Akiva, M., and Lerman, S. R.. 1985. Discrete Choice Analysis. Theory and Application to Travel Demand. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Berelson, B., Lazarsfeld, P. F., and McPhee, W. N.. 1954. Voting. A Study of Opinion Formation in a Presidential Campaign. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Berger, H., and Woitek, U.. 1997. “Searching for Political Business Cycles in Germany,” Public Choice 91: 179–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blais, A., and Nadeau, R.. 1992. “The Electoral Budget Cycle,” Public Choice 74: 389–403.Google Scholar
Bloom, H., and Price, D.. 1975. “Voter Response to Short-Run Economic Conditions: The Asymmetric Effect of Prosperity and Recession,” American Political Science Review 69: 1240–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bowler, S., and Lanoue, D. J.. 1992. “The Sources of Tactical Voting in British Parliamentary Elections, 1983–1987,” Political Behavior 14: 141–57.Google Scholar
Brug, W. van der, and C. van der Eijk. 2000. “De campagne deed er toe, mediagebruik niet,” in Tussen Beeld en Inhoud. Politiek en media in de verkiezingen van 1998, Praag, P. Jr., and Brants, K. (eds.). Amsterdam: Het Spinhuis, pp. 214–43.Google Scholar
Brug, W., and Eijk, C. (eds.). Forthcoming. European Elections and Domestic Politics. Lessons from the Past and Scenarios for the Future. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press.Google Scholar
Brug, W. van der, C. van der Eijk, and M. Franklin. 2002. “The Reasoning Public: Education, Interest and Political Choices.” Paper presented at Joint Sessions of Workshops, ECPR, Turin, March.
Brug, W. van der, C. van der Eijk, and M. Franklin. Forthcoming. “EU Support and Party Choice,” in European Elections and Domestic Politics. Lessons from the Past and Scenarios for the Future, Brug, W. and Eijk, C. (eds.). Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press, pp.Google Scholar
Brug, W., Fennema, M., and Tillie, J. 2000. “Anti-immigrant Parties in Europe: Ideological or Protest Vote.” European Journal of Political Research 37: 77–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Budge, I., Robertson, D., and Hearl, D. (eds.). 1987. Ideology, Strategy, and Party Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burden, B. C. 1997. “Deterministic and Probabilistic Voting Models,” American Journal of Political Science 41: 1150–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Butler, D. E., and Stokes, D. E.. 1974. Political Change in Britain – the Evolution of Electoral Choice, 2nd ed. London: Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campbell, A., Converse, P. E., Miller, W. E., and Stokes, D. E.. 1960. The American Voter. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Campbell, A., Converse, P. E., Miller, W. E., and Stokes, D. E.. 1966. Elections and the Political Order. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Campbell, J. E., and Garand, J. C.. 2000. Before the Vote. Forecasting American National Elections. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Campbell, A., and Kahn, R. L.. 1952. The People Elect a President. Ann Arbor, MI: Survey Research Center I.S.R.Google Scholar
Chrystal, K. A., and Alt, J. E.. 1981. “Some Problems in Formulating and Testing a Politico-Economic Model of the United Kingdom,” The Economic Journal 91: 730–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Claggett, W. 1986. “A Re-examination of the Asymmetry Hypothesis: Economic Expansions, Contractions and Congressional Elections,” Western Political Quarterly 39: 623–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clarke, H. D., and Stewart, M.. 1995. “Economic Evaluations, Prime Ministerial Approval and Governing Party Support: Rival Models Considered,” British Journal of Political Science 25: 15–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clarke, H. D., Stewart, M., and Whiteley, P.. 1998. “New Models for New Labour: The Political Economy of Labour Party Support, January 1992–April 1997,” American Political Science Review 92: 559–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clarke, H. D., and Whiteley, P.. 1990. “Presidential Approval, Partisanship and the Economy: Evidence from the 1984 Continuous Monitoring Survey,” International Journal of Public Opinion Research 2: 1–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Conover, P. J., and Feldman, S. 1982. “Projection and Perceptions of Candidates' Issue Positions,” Western Political Quarterly 35: 228–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Conover, P. J., and Feldman, S.. 1984. “How People Organize the Political World: A Schematic Model,” American Journal of Political Science 28: 95–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Converse, P. E. 1964. “The Nature of Belief Systems in Mass Publics,” in Ideology and Discontent, Apter, D. (eds.). Glencoe, IL: Free Press, pp. 219–41.Google Scholar
Converse, P. E. 1966. “The Concept of a Normal Vote,” in Elections and the Political Order, Campbell, A., Converse, P. E., Miller, W. E., and Stokes, D. E. (eds.). New York: Wiley, pp. 9–39.Google Scholar
Converse, P. E. 1970. “Attitudes and Non-attitudes: Continuation of a Dialogue,” in The Quantitative Analysis of Social Problems, Tufte, E. R. (ed.). Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley, pp. 168–89.Google Scholar
Dalen, H. P., and Swank, O. H.. 1996. “Government Spending Cycles: Ideological or Opportunistic?Public Choice 89: 183–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dalton, R. J., and M. Wattenberg. 1993. “The Not So Simple Act of Voting,” in Political Science: The State of the Discipline II, Finifter, A. W. (eds.). Washington, DC: American Political Science Association, pp. 424–47.Google Scholar
Daudt, H. 1961. Floating Voters and the Floating Vote. Leiden: Stenfert Kroese.Google Scholar
Diez-Roux, A. V. 2000. “Multilevel Analysis in Public Health Research,” Annual Review of Public Health 21: 171–92.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dorussen, H., and Taylor, M. (eds.). 2002. Economic Voting. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Downs, A. 1957. An Economic Theory of Democracy. New York: Harper and Row.Google Scholar
Duch, R. M., and Palmer, H. D.. 2002. “Heteregeneous Perceptions of Economic Conditions in Cross-National Perspective,” in Economic Voting, H. Dorussen and M. Taylor (eds.). London: Routledge, pp. 139–72.Google Scholar
Duch, R. M., and Stevenson, R.. 2003. “Re-evaluating Economic Voting.” Paper presented at the Joint Sessions of Workshops, ECPR, Edinburgh.
Eijk, C.. 2001. “Measuring Agreement in Ordered Rating Scales,” Quality and Quantity 35: 325–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eijk, C.. 2002. “Design Issues in Electoral Research: Taking Care of (Core) Business,” Electoral Studies 21: 189–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eijk, C., Brug, W., Kroh, M., and Franklin, M.. 2006. “Rethinking the Dependent Variable in Voting Behavior – on the Measurement and Analysis of Electoral Utilities,” Electoral Studies 25.Google Scholar
Eijk, C., and Franklin, M.. 1996. Choosing Europe? The European Electorate and National Politics in the Face of Union. Ann Arbor: University ofMichigan Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eijk, C. van der, M. Franklin, and W. van der Brug. 1999. “Policy Preferences and Party Choice,” in Political Representation and Legitimacy in the European Union, Schmitt, H. and Thomassen, J. (eds.). Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 161–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eijk, C. van der, and M. Franklin, with F. Demant and W. van der Brug. 2004. “The Endogenous Economy: ‘Real’ Economic Conditions and Subjective Economic Evaluations.” Paper presented at the Workshop on “Perceptions, Preferences and Rationalization: Overcoming the Problem of Causal Inference in the Study of Voting,” Nuffield College, Oxford.
Eijk, C. van der, and M. Franklin, F. Demant, W. van der Brug. 2007. “The Endogenous Economy: ‘Real’ Economic Conditions, Subjective Economic Evaluations and Government Support,” Acta Politica 42(1).
Eijk, C., Franklin, M., and Marsh, M.. 1996. “What Voters Teach Us about Europe-wide Elections; What Europe-wide Elections Teach Us about Voters,” Electoral Studies 15: 149–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eijk, C. van der, M. Franklin, and E. Oppenhuis. 1996. “The Strategic Context: Party Choice,” in Choosing Europe? The European Electorate and National Politics in the Face of Union, Eijk, C., Franklin, M., et al. (eds.). Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, pp. 332–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eijk, C., and Niemöller, B.. 1983. Electoral Change in the Netherlands. Empirical Research and Methods of Measurement. Amsterdam: CT Press.Google Scholar
Eijk, C., and Niemöller, B.. 1984. “Het potentiële electoraat van de Nederlandse politieke partijen,” Beleid en Maatschappij 11: 192–204.Google Scholar
Eijk, C., and Oppenhuis, E.. 1991. “European Parties' Performance in Electoral Competition,” European Journal of Political Research 19: 55–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Enelow, J., and Hinich, M.. 1984. “Probabilistic Voting and the Importance of Centrist Ideologies in Democratic Elections,” Journal of Politics 46: 459–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Erikson, R. S. 1989. “Economic Conditions and the Presidential Vote,” American Political Science Review 83: 567–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Erikson, R. S. 2002. “National Election Studies and Macro Analysis,” Electoral Studies 21: 269–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Erikson, R. S., MacKuen, M., and Stimson, J. A.. 2002. The Macro Polity. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Esping-Andersen, G. 1990. Three Worlds of Welfare Capitalism. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Esping-Andersen, G. 1999. Social Foundations of Post-industrial Economies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fair, R. 1988. “The Effect of Economic Events on the Vote for President: A 1984 Update,” Political Behavior 10: 168–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Feldman, S., and Conover, P. J.. 1983. “Candidates, Issues, and Voters: The Role of Inference in Political Perception,” Journal of Politics 45: 812–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fiorina, M. P. 1978. “Economic Retrospective Voting in American National Elections: A Micro-Analysis,” American Journal of Political Science 22: 426–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fiske, S. T., and Linville, P. W.. 1980. “What Does the Schema Concept Buy Us?Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 6: 543–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Franklin, M., C. van der Eijk, and E. Oppenhuis. 1996. “The Institutional Context: Turnout,” in Choosing Europe? The European Electorate and National Politics in the Face of Union, Eijk, Cees and Franklin, Mark (eds.). Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, pp. 306–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Franklin, M., and C. Hughes. 1999. “Dynamic Representation in Britain,” in A Critical Election? British Voters and Parties in Long-Term Perspective, Norris, P., and Evans, G. (eds.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, pp. 240–58.Google Scholar
Franklin, M., Mackie, T., Valen, H., et al. 1992. Electoral Change: Responses to Evolving Social and Attitudinal Structures in Western Countries. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Franklin, M., Niemi, R., and Whitten, G.. 1994. “The Two Faces of Tactical Voting,” British Journal of Political Science 24: 549–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Franklin, M., and Wlezien, C.. 1997. “The Responsive Public: Issue Salience, Policy Change, and Preferences for European Unification,” Journal of Theoretical Politics 9: 347–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Galli, E., and Rossi, S. P. S.. 2002. “Political Budget Cycles: The Case of the Western German Länder,” Public Choice 110: 283–303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Golden, D. G., and Poterba, J. M.. 1980. “The Price of Popularity: The Political Business Cycle Reexamined,” American Journal of Political Science 24: 696–714.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haverland, M. 2001. “Another Dutch Miracle? Explaining Dutch and German Pension Trajectories,” Journal of European Social Policy 11: 308–23.CrossRef
Heath, A., and Evans, G.. 1994. “Tactical Voting: Concepts, Measurement and Findings,” British Journal of Political Science 24: 557–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hemerijck, A. 2003. “A Paradoxical Miracle: The Politics of Coalition Government and Social Concertation in Dutch Welfare Reform,” in Konzertierung, Verhandlungsdemokratie und Reformpolitik im Wohlfahrtsstaat, Jochem, S. and Siegel, N. A. (eds.). Opladen: Leske and Budrich, pp. 232–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hibbs, D. A. 1977. “Political Parties and Macroeconomic Policy,” American Political Science Review 71: 1467–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hibbs, D. A. 1982. “On Demand for Economic Outcomes: Macroeconomic Performance and Mass Political Support in the United States, Great Britain and Germany,” Journal of Politics 44: 426–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Iyengar, S., Kinder, D. R., Peters, M. D., and Krosnick, J. A.. 1984. “The Evening News and Presidential Evaluations,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 46: 778–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jacobson, G. C. 1983. The Politics of Congressional Elections. Boston: Little, Brown.Google Scholar
Kahneman, D., and Tversky, A.. 1979. “Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under risk,” Econometrica 47: 263–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Karp, J. A., Vowles, J., Banducci, S. A., and Donovan, T.. 2002. “Strategic Voting, Party Activity, and Candidate Effects: Testing Explanations for Split Voting in New Zealand's New Mixed System,” Electoral Studies 21: 1–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Key, V. O. Jr. 1966. The Responsible Electorate: Rationality in Presidential Voting, 1936–1960. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kiewiet, D. R. 1983. Macroeconomics and Micropolitics: The Electoral Effects of Economic Issues. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Kinder, D. R. 1993. “Coming to Grips with the Holy Ghost,” in Experimental Foundations of Political Science, Kinder, D. R., and Palfrey, T. R. (eds.). Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, pp. 1–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kinder, D. R., and Kiewiet, D. R.. 1979. “Economic Discontent and Political Behavior: The Role of Personal Grievances and Collective Economic Judgments in Congressional Voting,” American Journal of Political Science 23: 495–527.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kinder, D. R., and Kiewiet, D. R.. 1981. “Sociotropic Politics: The American Case,” British Journal of Political Science 11: 129–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Klingemann, H.-D., Hofferbert, R., and Budge, I.. 1994. Parties, Policies and Democracy. Boulder, CO: Sage.Google Scholar
Kramer, G. 1983. “The Ecological Fallacy Revisited: Aggregate- versus Individual-Level Findings on Economics and Elections, and Sociotropic Voting,” American Political Science Review 77: 92–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krause, G. A. 1997. “Voters, Information Heterogeneity, and the Dynamics of Aggregate Economic Expectations,” American Journal of Political Science 41: 1170–1200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kroh, M. 2003. “Parties, Politicians and Policies. Orientations of Vote Choice across Voters and Contexts.” PhD dissertation, University of Amsterdam.
Kroh, M., W. van der Brug, and C. van der Eijk. Forthcoming. “Prospects for Electoral Change,” in European Elections and Domestic Politics. Lessons from the Past and Scenarios for the Future, Brug, W. and Eijk, C. (eds.). Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press.Google Scholar
Lewis-Beck, M. S. 1988. Economics and Elections: The Major Western Democracies. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
Lewis-Beck, M. S., and Paldam, M.. 2000. “Economic Voting: An Introduction,” Electoral Studies 19: 113–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lewis-Beck, M. S., and Stegmaier, M.. 2000. “Economic Determinants of Electoral Outcomes,” Annual Review of Political Science 3: 183–219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lijphart, A. 1999. Patterns of Democracy. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Lupia, A., and McCubbins, M. D.. 1998. The Democratic Dilemma. Can Citizens Learn What They Need to Know?New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Luskin, R. C. 1987. “Measuring Political Sophistication,” American Journal of Political Science 31: 856–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maas, K., Steenbergen, M., and Saris, W.. 1990. “Vote Probabilities,” Electoral Studies 9: 91–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MacDonald, S. E., Listhaug, O., and Rabinowitz, G.. 1991. “Issues and Party Support in Multiparty Systems,” American Political Science Review 85: 1107–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mackuen, M. B., , R.Erikson, S., and Stimson, J. A.. 1992. “Peasants or Bankers? The American Electorate and the U.S. Economy,” American Political Science Review 86: 597–611.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mair, P. 2002a. “De eigenaardigheden van de Nederlanders. De verkiezingen van 2002 in een vergelijkend perspectief,” B en M Tijdschrift voor Beleid, Politiek en Maatschappij 29: 160–3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mair, P. 2002b. “In the Aggregate: Mass Electoral Behaviour in Western Europe, 1950–2000,” in Comparative Democratic Politics. A Guide to Contemporary Theory and Research, Keman, H. (ed.). London: Sage, pp. 122–40.Google Scholar
Markus, G. B. 1988. “The Impact of Personal and National Economic Conditions on the Presidential Vote: A Pooled Cross-Sectional Analysis,” American Journal of Political Science 32: 137–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Markus, G. B. 1992. “The Impact of Personal and National Economic Conditions on Presidential Voting, 1956–1988 (an Update),” American Journal of Political Science 36: 829–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marsh, M. 1998. “Testing the Second-Order Election Model After Four European Elections,” British Journal of Political Science 28: 591–607.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marsh, M., and M. Franklin. 1996. “The Foundations: Unanswered Questions from the Study of European Elections, 1979–1994,” in Choosing Europe? The European Electorate and National Politics in the Face of Union, Eijk, C., Franklin, M., et al. (eds.). Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, pp. 332–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nadeau, R., and Lewis-Beck, M. S.. 2001. “National Economic Voting in U.S. Presidential Elections,” Journal of Politics 63: 159–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nannestad, P., and Paldam, M.. 1994. “The VP-Function: A Survey of the Literature on Vote and Popularity Functions After 25 Years,” Public Choice 79: 213–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nannestad, P., and Paldam, M.. 1997. “The Grievance Asymmetry Revisited: A Micro Study of Economic Voting in Denmark, 1986–1992,” European Journal of Political Economy 13: 81–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nannestad, P., and M. Paldam. 2002. “The Cost of Ruling: a Foundation Stone for Two Theories,” in Economic Voting, Dorussen, H. and Taylor, M. (eds.). London: Routledge, pp. 17–44.Google Scholar
Nickell, S., and Ours, J.. 1999. “The Netherlands and the United Kingdom: A European Unemployment Miracle?” Paper presented in Frankfurt at the Economic Policy Panel Meeting, April 9, 1999, and in Ottawa at the CSLS Conference on the Structural Aspects of Unemployment in Canada, April 23, 1999.Google Scholar
Niemi, R. G., Whitten, G., and Franklin, M. N.. 1992. “Constituency Characteristics, Individual Characteristics and Tactical Voting in the 1987 British General Election,” British Journal of Political Science 22: 229–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nordhaus, W. D. 1975. “The Political Business Cycle,” The Review of Economic Studies 42: 169–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Norpoth, H. 1996. “The Economy,” in Comparing Democracies: Elections and Voting in Global Perspective, LeDuc, L., Niemi, R. G., and Norris, P. (eds.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, pp. 299–318.Google Scholar
Oppenhuis, E. 1995. Voting Behavior in Europe. A Comparative Analysis of Electoral Participation and Party Choice. Amsterdam: Het Spinhuis.Google Scholar
Oppenhuis, E., C. van der Eijk, and M. Franklin. 1996. “The Party Context: Outcomes,” in Choosing Europe? The European Electorate and National Politics in the Face of Union, Eijk, Cees and Franklin, Mark (eds.). Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, pp. 287–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ordeshook, P. C., and Zeng, L.. 1997. “Rational Voters and Strategic Voting: Evidence from the 1968, 1980, and 1992 Elections,” Journal of Theoretical Politics 9: 167–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paldam, M. 1991. “How Robust Is the Vote Function? A Study of 17 Countries Over Four Decades,” in Economics and Politics: The Calculus of Support, Norpoth, H., Lewis-Beck, M. S., and Lafay, J.-D. (eds.). Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, pp. 9–31.Google Scholar
Paldam, M. 1997. “Political Business Cycles,” in Perspectives on Public Choice: A Handbook, ed. D. Mueller. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 342–70.Google Scholar
Pattie, C. J., and Johnston, R. J.. 2001. “Routes to Party Choice: Ideology, Economic Evaluations and Voting at the 1997 British General Election,” European Journal of Political Research 39: 373–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Popkin, S. 1991. The Reasoning Voter. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Powell, G. B. Jr. 2000. Elections as Instruments of Democracy. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Powell, G. B.., and Whitten, B. G.. 1993. “A Cross-National Analysis of Economic Voting: Taking Account of the Political Context,” American Journal of Political Science 37: 391–414.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Price, S., and Sanders, D.. 1993. “Modeling Government Popularity in Postwar Britain: A Methodological Example,” American Journal of Political Science 37: 317–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Price, S., and Sanders, D.. 1994. “Party Support and Economic Perceptions in the UK: A Two-Level Approach,” in British Elections and Parties Yearbook, eds. D. Broughton et al. London: Frank Cass, pp. 46–72.Google Scholar
Przeworski, A., and Teune, H.. 1970. The Logic of Comparative Social Inquiry. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Rabinowitz, G., and MacDonald, S.. 1989. “A Directional Theory of Issue Voting,” American Political Science Review 83: 93–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reif, K. (ed.). 1984. European Elections 1979/81 and 1984. Conclusion and Perspectives from Empirical Research. Berlin: Quorum.Google Scholar
Reif, K., and Schmitt, H.. 1980. “Nine Second-Order National Elections. A Conceptual Framework for the Analysis of European Election Results,” European Journal for Political Research 8: 3–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robinson, W. S. 1950. “Ecological Correlations and the Behavior of Individuals,” American Sociological Review 15: 351–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Royed, T. J., Leyden, K. M., and Borrelli, S. A.. 2000. “Is ‘Clarity of Responsibility’ Important for Economic Voting? Revisiting Powell and Whitten's Hypothesis,” British Journal of Political Science 30: 669–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sanders, D. 1996. “Economic Performance, Management Competence and the Outcome of the Next General Election,” Political Studies 44: 203–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sanders, D. 1999. “Conservative Incompetence, Labour Responsibility, and the Feelgood Factor: Why the Economy Failed to Save the Conservatives in 1997,” Electoral Studies 18: 251–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Saris, W. E. (ed.). 1988. Variation in Response Function: A Source of Measurement Error. Amsterdam: SRF.Google Scholar
Sartori, G. 1976. Parties and Party Systems. A Framework for Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Schmitt, H., and K. Reif. 2003. “Der Hauptwahlzyklus und die Ergebnisse von Nebenwahlen: Konzeptuelle und empirische Rekonstruktionen am Beispiel der Europawahlen in Wahlzyklus der Bundesrepublik,” in Politbarometer, Wuest, A. M. (ed.). Opladen: Leske und Budrich, pp. 239–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schmitt, H., and Thomassen, J. (eds.) 1999. Political Representation and Legitimacy in the European Union. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sniderman, P. M. 1993. “The New Look in Public Opinion Research,” in Political Science: The State of the Discipline II, Finifter, A. W. (ed.). Washington, DC: The American Political Science Association, pp. 219–45.Google Scholar
Sniderman, P. M., Brody, R. A., and Tetlock, P. E. (eds.). 1991. Reasoning and Choice: Explorations in Political Psychology. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Snijders, T. A. B., and Bosker, R. J.. 1999. Multilevel Analysis. An Introduction to Basic and Advanced Multilevel Modeling. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Steenbergen, M. R., and Jones, B. S.. 2002. “Modeling Multilevel Data Structures,” American Journal of Political Science 46: 218–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stevenson, R. T. (2002). “The Economy as Context: Indirect Links Between the Economy and Voters,” in Economic Voting, Dorussen, H. and Taylor, M. (eds.). London: Routledge, pp. 45–65.Google Scholar
Stimson, J. A. 1985. “Regression in Space and Time: A Statistical Essay,” American Journal of Political Science 29: 914–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stoker, L., and J. Bowers. 2002. “Designing Multi-Level Studies: Sampling Voters and Electoral Contexts,” in The Future of Election Studies, Franklin, M. and Wlezien, C. (eds.). Amsterdam: Pergamon, pp. 77–110.Google Scholar
Thomassen, J. (ed.)., 2005. The European Voter. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tillie, J. 1995. Party Utility and Voting Behavior. Amsterdam: Het Spinhuis.Google Scholar
Train, K. E. 2003. Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Treisman, D., and Gimpelson, V.. 2001. “Political Business Cycles and Russian Elections, or the Manipulations of ‘Chudar,’British Journal of Political Science 31: 225–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tufte, E. 1978. Political Control of the Economy. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Visser, J., and Hemerijck, A.. 1997. A Dutch Miracle: Job Growth, Welfare Reform and Corporatism in the Netherlands. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whitten, G., and Palmer, H. D.. 1999. “Cross-National Analyses of Economic Voting,” Electoral Studies 18: 49–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilkin, S., Haller, B., and Norpoth, H.. 1997. “From Argentina to Zambia – A World-Wide Test of Economic Voting,” Electoral Studies 16: 301–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wlezien, C. 1995. “The Public as Thermostat: Dynamics of Preferences for Spending,” American Journal of Political Science 39: 981–1000.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wlezien, C. 2004. “Patterns of Representation: Dynamics of Public Preferences and Policy,” The Journal of Politics 66: 1–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wlezien, C., and Erikson, R. S.. 2002. “The Timeline of Presidential Election Campaigns,” The Journal of Politics 64: 969–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wlezien, C., Franklin, M., and Twiggs, D.. 1997. “Economic Perceptions and Vote Choice: Disentangling the Endogeneity,” Political Behavior 19: 7–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zaller, J. R. 1992. The Nature and Origins of Mass Opinion. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zaller, J. R. 2002. “The Statistical Power of Election Studies to Detect Media Exposure Effects in Political Campaigns,” Electoral Studies 21: 297–329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zaller, J. R. 2005. “Floating Voters in U.S. Presidential Elections 1948–2000,” in Studies in Public Opinion: Attitudes, Nonattitudes, Measurement Error, and Change, Saris, W. E. and Sniderman, P. M. (eds.). Princeton: Princeton University Press, pp. 166–214.Google Scholar
Alvarez, R. M., and Nagler, J.. 1998. “When Politics and Models Collide: Estimating Models of Multiparty Elections,” American Journal of Political Science 42: 55–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alvarez, R. M., and Nagler, J.. 2000. “A New Approach for Modelling Strategic Voting in Multiparty Elections,” British Journal of Political Science 30: 57–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anderson, C. 1995. Blaming the Government: Citizens and the Economy in Five European Democracies. Armonk, NY: M. E. Sharpe.Google Scholar
Anker, H. 1992. Normal Vote Analysis. Amsterdam: Het Spinhuis.Google Scholar
Anker, H., and E. Oppenhuis. 1995. Dutch Parliamentary Election Study 1994. Amsterdam: Steinmetz Archive/SKON (the ICPSR version of this dataset was published in 1997, Study Nr. 6740).
Ansolabehere, S., and Iyengar, S.. 1995. Going Negative: How Political Advertisements Shrink and Polarize the Electorate. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Ark, B., and Haan, J.. 2000. “The Delta-Model Revisited: Recent Trends in the Structural Performance of the Dutch Economy,” International Review of Applied Economics 14: 307–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barry, B. M. 1970. Sociologists, Economists and Democracy. London: Collier-Macmillan.Google Scholar
Bartels, L. M. 2002. “Beyond the Running Tally: Partisan Bias in Political Perceptions,” Political Behavior 24: 117–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bartle, J. 1997. “Political Awareness and Heterogeneity in Models of Voting: Some Evidence from the Recent British Election Studies,” in British Elections and Parties Review 7, PattieDenver, C. D., Fisher, J., and Ludlam, S. (eds.). London: Frank Cass, pp. 1–22.Google Scholar
Beck, N., and Katz, J.. 1995. “What to Do (and Not to Do) with Time-Series-Cross-Section Data in Comparative Politics,” American Political Science Review 89: 634–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ben-Akiva, M., and Lerman, S. R.. 1985. Discrete Choice Analysis. Theory and Application to Travel Demand. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Berelson, B., Lazarsfeld, P. F., and McPhee, W. N.. 1954. Voting. A Study of Opinion Formation in a Presidential Campaign. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Berger, H., and Woitek, U.. 1997. “Searching for Political Business Cycles in Germany,” Public Choice 91: 179–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blais, A., and Nadeau, R.. 1992. “The Electoral Budget Cycle,” Public Choice 74: 389–403.Google Scholar
Bloom, H., and Price, D.. 1975. “Voter Response to Short-Run Economic Conditions: The Asymmetric Effect of Prosperity and Recession,” American Political Science Review 69: 1240–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bowler, S., and Lanoue, D. J.. 1992. “The Sources of Tactical Voting in British Parliamentary Elections, 1983–1987,” Political Behavior 14: 141–57.Google Scholar
Brug, W. van der, and C. van der Eijk. 2000. “De campagne deed er toe, mediagebruik niet,” in Tussen Beeld en Inhoud. Politiek en media in de verkiezingen van 1998, Praag, P. Jr., and Brants, K. (eds.). Amsterdam: Het Spinhuis, pp. 214–43.Google Scholar
Brug, W., and Eijk, C. (eds.). Forthcoming. European Elections and Domestic Politics. Lessons from the Past and Scenarios for the Future. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press.Google Scholar
Brug, W. van der, C. van der Eijk, and M. Franklin. 2002. “The Reasoning Public: Education, Interest and Political Choices.” Paper presented at Joint Sessions of Workshops, ECPR, Turin, March.
Brug, W. van der, C. van der Eijk, and M. Franklin. Forthcoming. “EU Support and Party Choice,” in European Elections and Domestic Politics. Lessons from the Past and Scenarios for the Future, Brug, W. and Eijk, C. (eds.). Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press, pp.Google Scholar
Brug, W., Fennema, M., and Tillie, J. 2000. “Anti-immigrant Parties in Europe: Ideological or Protest Vote.” European Journal of Political Research 37: 77–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Budge, I., Robertson, D., and Hearl, D. (eds.). 1987. Ideology, Strategy, and Party Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burden, B. C. 1997. “Deterministic and Probabilistic Voting Models,” American Journal of Political Science 41: 1150–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Butler, D. E., and Stokes, D. E.. 1974. Political Change in Britain – the Evolution of Electoral Choice, 2nd ed. London: Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campbell, A., Converse, P. E., Miller, W. E., and Stokes, D. E.. 1960. The American Voter. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Campbell, A., Converse, P. E., Miller, W. E., and Stokes, D. E.. 1966. Elections and the Political Order. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Campbell, J. E., and Garand, J. C.. 2000. Before the Vote. Forecasting American National Elections. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Campbell, A., and Kahn, R. L.. 1952. The People Elect a President. Ann Arbor, MI: Survey Research Center I.S.R.Google Scholar
Chrystal, K. A., and Alt, J. E.. 1981. “Some Problems in Formulating and Testing a Politico-Economic Model of the United Kingdom,” The Economic Journal 91: 730–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Claggett, W. 1986. “A Re-examination of the Asymmetry Hypothesis: Economic Expansions, Contractions and Congressional Elections,” Western Political Quarterly 39: 623–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clarke, H. D., and Stewart, M.. 1995. “Economic Evaluations, Prime Ministerial Approval and Governing Party Support: Rival Models Considered,” British Journal of Political Science 25: 15–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clarke, H. D., Stewart, M., and Whiteley, P.. 1998. “New Models for New Labour: The Political Economy of Labour Party Support, January 1992–April 1997,” American Political Science Review 92: 559–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clarke, H. D., and Whiteley, P.. 1990. “Presidential Approval, Partisanship and the Economy: Evidence from the 1984 Continuous Monitoring Survey,” International Journal of Public Opinion Research 2: 1–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Conover, P. J., and Feldman, S. 1982. “Projection and Perceptions of Candidates' Issue Positions,” Western Political Quarterly 35: 228–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Conover, P. J., and Feldman, S.. 1984. “How People Organize the Political World: A Schematic Model,” American Journal of Political Science 28: 95–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Converse, P. E. 1964. “The Nature of Belief Systems in Mass Publics,” in Ideology and Discontent, Apter, D. (eds.). Glencoe, IL: Free Press, pp. 219–41.Google Scholar
Converse, P. E. 1966. “The Concept of a Normal Vote,” in Elections and the Political Order, Campbell, A., Converse, P. E., Miller, W. E., and Stokes, D. E. (eds.). New York: Wiley, pp. 9–39.Google Scholar
Converse, P. E. 1970. “Attitudes and Non-attitudes: Continuation of a Dialogue,” in The Quantitative Analysis of Social Problems, Tufte, E. R. (ed.). Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley, pp. 168–89.Google Scholar
Dalen, H. P., and Swank, O. H.. 1996. “Government Spending Cycles: Ideological or Opportunistic?Public Choice 89: 183–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dalton, R. J., and M. Wattenberg. 1993. “The Not So Simple Act of Voting,” in Political Science: The State of the Discipline II, Finifter, A. W. (eds.). Washington, DC: American Political Science Association, pp. 424–47.Google Scholar
Daudt, H. 1961. Floating Voters and the Floating Vote. Leiden: Stenfert Kroese.Google Scholar
Diez-Roux, A. V. 2000. “Multilevel Analysis in Public Health Research,” Annual Review of Public Health 21: 171–92.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dorussen, H., and Taylor, M. (eds.). 2002. Economic Voting. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Downs, A. 1957. An Economic Theory of Democracy. New York: Harper and Row.Google Scholar
Duch, R. M., and Palmer, H. D.. 2002. “Heteregeneous Perceptions of Economic Conditions in Cross-National Perspective,” in Economic Voting, H. Dorussen and M. Taylor (eds.). London: Routledge, pp. 139–72.Google Scholar
Duch, R. M., and Stevenson, R.. 2003. “Re-evaluating Economic Voting.” Paper presented at the Joint Sessions of Workshops, ECPR, Edinburgh.
Eijk, C.. 2001. “Measuring Agreement in Ordered Rating Scales,” Quality and Quantity 35: 325–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eijk, C.. 2002. “Design Issues in Electoral Research: Taking Care of (Core) Business,” Electoral Studies 21: 189–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eijk, C., Brug, W., Kroh, M., and Franklin, M.. 2006. “Rethinking the Dependent Variable in Voting Behavior – on the Measurement and Analysis of Electoral Utilities,” Electoral Studies 25.Google Scholar
Eijk, C., and Franklin, M.. 1996. Choosing Europe? The European Electorate and National Politics in the Face of Union. Ann Arbor: University ofMichigan Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eijk, C. van der, M. Franklin, and W. van der Brug. 1999. “Policy Preferences and Party Choice,” in Political Representation and Legitimacy in the European Union, Schmitt, H. and Thomassen, J. (eds.). Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 161–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eijk, C. van der, and M. Franklin, with F. Demant and W. van der Brug. 2004. “The Endogenous Economy: ‘Real’ Economic Conditions and Subjective Economic Evaluations.” Paper presented at the Workshop on “Perceptions, Preferences and Rationalization: Overcoming the Problem of Causal Inference in the Study of Voting,” Nuffield College, Oxford.
Eijk, C. van der, and M. Franklin, F. Demant, W. van der Brug. 2007. “The Endogenous Economy: ‘Real’ Economic Conditions, Subjective Economic Evaluations and Government Support,” Acta Politica 42(1).
Eijk, C., Franklin, M., and Marsh, M.. 1996. “What Voters Teach Us about Europe-wide Elections; What Europe-wide Elections Teach Us about Voters,” Electoral Studies 15: 149–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eijk, C. van der, M. Franklin, and E. Oppenhuis. 1996. “The Strategic Context: Party Choice,” in Choosing Europe? The European Electorate and National Politics in the Face of Union, Eijk, C., Franklin, M., et al. (eds.). Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, pp. 332–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eijk, C., and Niemöller, B.. 1983. Electoral Change in the Netherlands. Empirical Research and Methods of Measurement. Amsterdam: CT Press.Google Scholar
Eijk, C., and Niemöller, B.. 1984. “Het potentiële electoraat van de Nederlandse politieke partijen,” Beleid en Maatschappij 11: 192–204.Google Scholar
Eijk, C., and Oppenhuis, E.. 1991. “European Parties' Performance in Electoral Competition,” European Journal of Political Research 19: 55–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Enelow, J., and Hinich, M.. 1984. “Probabilistic Voting and the Importance of Centrist Ideologies in Democratic Elections,” Journal of Politics 46: 459–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Erikson, R. S. 1989. “Economic Conditions and the Presidential Vote,” American Political Science Review 83: 567–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Erikson, R. S. 2002. “National Election Studies and Macro Analysis,” Electoral Studies 21: 269–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Erikson, R. S., MacKuen, M., and Stimson, J. A.. 2002. The Macro Polity. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Esping-Andersen, G. 1990. Three Worlds of Welfare Capitalism. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Esping-Andersen, G. 1999. Social Foundations of Post-industrial Economies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fair, R. 1988. “The Effect of Economic Events on the Vote for President: A 1984 Update,” Political Behavior 10: 168–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Feldman, S., and Conover, P. J.. 1983. “Candidates, Issues, and Voters: The Role of Inference in Political Perception,” Journal of Politics 45: 812–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fiorina, M. P. 1978. “Economic Retrospective Voting in American National Elections: A Micro-Analysis,” American Journal of Political Science 22: 426–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fiske, S. T., and Linville, P. W.. 1980. “What Does the Schema Concept Buy Us?Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 6: 543–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Franklin, M., C. van der Eijk, and E. Oppenhuis. 1996. “The Institutional Context: Turnout,” in Choosing Europe? The European Electorate and National Politics in the Face of Union, Eijk, Cees and Franklin, Mark (eds.). Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, pp. 306–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Franklin, M., and C. Hughes. 1999. “Dynamic Representation in Britain,” in A Critical Election? British Voters and Parties in Long-Term Perspective, Norris, P., and Evans, G. (eds.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, pp. 240–58.Google Scholar
Franklin, M., Mackie, T., Valen, H., et al. 1992. Electoral Change: Responses to Evolving Social and Attitudinal Structures in Western Countries. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Franklin, M., Niemi, R., and Whitten, G.. 1994. “The Two Faces of Tactical Voting,” British Journal of Political Science 24: 549–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Franklin, M., and Wlezien, C.. 1997. “The Responsive Public: Issue Salience, Policy Change, and Preferences for European Unification,” Journal of Theoretical Politics 9: 347–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Galli, E., and Rossi, S. P. S.. 2002. “Political Budget Cycles: The Case of the Western German Länder,” Public Choice 110: 283–303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Golden, D. G., and Poterba, J. M.. 1980. “The Price of Popularity: The Political Business Cycle Reexamined,” American Journal of Political Science 24: 696–714.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haverland, M. 2001. “Another Dutch Miracle? Explaining Dutch and German Pension Trajectories,” Journal of European Social Policy 11: 308–23.CrossRef
Heath, A., and Evans, G.. 1994. “Tactical Voting: Concepts, Measurement and Findings,” British Journal of Political Science 24: 557–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hemerijck, A. 2003. “A Paradoxical Miracle: The Politics of Coalition Government and Social Concertation in Dutch Welfare Reform,” in Konzertierung, Verhandlungsdemokratie und Reformpolitik im Wohlfahrtsstaat, Jochem, S. and Siegel, N. A. (eds.). Opladen: Leske and Budrich, pp. 232–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hibbs, D. A. 1977. “Political Parties and Macroeconomic Policy,” American Political Science Review 71: 1467–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hibbs, D. A. 1982. “On Demand for Economic Outcomes: Macroeconomic Performance and Mass Political Support in the United States, Great Britain and Germany,” Journal of Politics 44: 426–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Iyengar, S., Kinder, D. R., Peters, M. D., and Krosnick, J. A.. 1984. “The Evening News and Presidential Evaluations,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 46: 778–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jacobson, G. C. 1983. The Politics of Congressional Elections. Boston: Little, Brown.Google Scholar
Kahneman, D., and Tversky, A.. 1979. “Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under risk,” Econometrica 47: 263–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Karp, J. A., Vowles, J., Banducci, S. A., and Donovan, T.. 2002. “Strategic Voting, Party Activity, and Candidate Effects: Testing Explanations for Split Voting in New Zealand's New Mixed System,” Electoral Studies 21: 1–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Key, V. O. Jr. 1966. The Responsible Electorate: Rationality in Presidential Voting, 1936–1960. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kiewiet, D. R. 1983. Macroeconomics and Micropolitics: The Electoral Effects of Economic Issues. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Kinder, D. R. 1993. “Coming to Grips with the Holy Ghost,” in Experimental Foundations of Political Science, Kinder, D. R., and Palfrey, T. R. (eds.). Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, pp. 1–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kinder, D. R., and Kiewiet, D. R.. 1979. “Economic Discontent and Political Behavior: The Role of Personal Grievances and Collective Economic Judgments in Congressional Voting,” American Journal of Political Science 23: 495–527.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kinder, D. R., and Kiewiet, D. R.. 1981. “Sociotropic Politics: The American Case,” British Journal of Political Science 11: 129–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Klingemann, H.-D., Hofferbert, R., and Budge, I.. 1994. Parties, Policies and Democracy. Boulder, CO: Sage.Google Scholar
Kramer, G. 1983. “The Ecological Fallacy Revisited: Aggregate- versus Individual-Level Findings on Economics and Elections, and Sociotropic Voting,” American Political Science Review 77: 92–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krause, G. A. 1997. “Voters, Information Heterogeneity, and the Dynamics of Aggregate Economic Expectations,” American Journal of Political Science 41: 1170–1200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kroh, M. 2003. “Parties, Politicians and Policies. Orientations of Vote Choice across Voters and Contexts.” PhD dissertation, University of Amsterdam.
Kroh, M., W. van der Brug, and C. van der Eijk. Forthcoming. “Prospects for Electoral Change,” in European Elections and Domestic Politics. Lessons from the Past and Scenarios for the Future, Brug, W. and Eijk, C. (eds.). Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press.Google Scholar
Lewis-Beck, M. S. 1988. Economics and Elections: The Major Western Democracies. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
Lewis-Beck, M. S., and Paldam, M.. 2000. “Economic Voting: An Introduction,” Electoral Studies 19: 113–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lewis-Beck, M. S., and Stegmaier, M.. 2000. “Economic Determinants of Electoral Outcomes,” Annual Review of Political Science 3: 183–219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lijphart, A. 1999. Patterns of Democracy. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Lupia, A., and McCubbins, M. D.. 1998. The Democratic Dilemma. Can Citizens Learn What They Need to Know?New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Luskin, R. C. 1987. “Measuring Political Sophistication,” American Journal of Political Science 31: 856–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maas, K., Steenbergen, M., and Saris, W.. 1990. “Vote Probabilities,” Electoral Studies 9: 91–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MacDonald, S. E., Listhaug, O., and Rabinowitz, G.. 1991. “Issues and Party Support in Multiparty Systems,” American Political Science Review 85: 1107–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mackuen, M. B., , R.Erikson, S., and Stimson, J. A.. 1992. “Peasants or Bankers? The American Electorate and the U.S. Economy,” American Political Science Review 86: 597–611.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mair, P. 2002a. “De eigenaardigheden van de Nederlanders. De verkiezingen van 2002 in een vergelijkend perspectief,” B en M Tijdschrift voor Beleid, Politiek en Maatschappij 29: 160–3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mair, P. 2002b. “In the Aggregate: Mass Electoral Behaviour in Western Europe, 1950–2000,” in Comparative Democratic Politics. A Guide to Contemporary Theory and Research, Keman, H. (ed.). London: Sage, pp. 122–40.Google Scholar
Markus, G. B. 1988. “The Impact of Personal and National Economic Conditions on the Presidential Vote: A Pooled Cross-Sectional Analysis,” American Journal of Political Science 32: 137–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Markus, G. B. 1992. “The Impact of Personal and National Economic Conditions on Presidential Voting, 1956–1988 (an Update),” American Journal of Political Science 36: 829–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marsh, M. 1998. “Testing the Second-Order Election Model After Four European Elections,” British Journal of Political Science 28: 591–607.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marsh, M., and M. Franklin. 1996. “The Foundations: Unanswered Questions from the Study of European Elections, 1979–1994,” in Choosing Europe? The European Electorate and National Politics in the Face of Union, Eijk, C., Franklin, M., et al. (eds.). Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, pp. 332–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nadeau, R., and Lewis-Beck, M. S.. 2001. “National Economic Voting in U.S. Presidential Elections,” Journal of Politics 63: 159–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nannestad, P., and Paldam, M.. 1994. “The VP-Function: A Survey of the Literature on Vote and Popularity Functions After 25 Years,” Public Choice 79: 213–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nannestad, P., and Paldam, M.. 1997. “The Grievance Asymmetry Revisited: A Micro Study of Economic Voting in Denmark, 1986–1992,” European Journal of Political Economy 13: 81–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nannestad, P., and M. Paldam. 2002. “The Cost of Ruling: a Foundation Stone for Two Theories,” in Economic Voting, Dorussen, H. and Taylor, M. (eds.). London: Routledge, pp. 17–44.Google Scholar
Nickell, S., and Ours, J.. 1999. “The Netherlands and the United Kingdom: A European Unemployment Miracle?” Paper presented in Frankfurt at the Economic Policy Panel Meeting, April 9, 1999, and in Ottawa at the CSLS Conference on the Structural Aspects of Unemployment in Canada, April 23, 1999.Google Scholar
Niemi, R. G., Whitten, G., and Franklin, M. N.. 1992. “Constituency Characteristics, Individual Characteristics and Tactical Voting in the 1987 British General Election,” British Journal of Political Science 22: 229–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nordhaus, W. D. 1975. “The Political Business Cycle,” The Review of Economic Studies 42: 169–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Norpoth, H. 1996. “The Economy,” in Comparing Democracies: Elections and Voting in Global Perspective, LeDuc, L., Niemi, R. G., and Norris, P. (eds.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, pp. 299–318.Google Scholar
Oppenhuis, E. 1995. Voting Behavior in Europe. A Comparative Analysis of Electoral Participation and Party Choice. Amsterdam: Het Spinhuis.Google Scholar
Oppenhuis, E., C. van der Eijk, and M. Franklin. 1996. “The Party Context: Outcomes,” in Choosing Europe? The European Electorate and National Politics in the Face of Union, Eijk, Cees and Franklin, Mark (eds.). Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, pp. 287–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ordeshook, P. C., and Zeng, L.. 1997. “Rational Voters and Strategic Voting: Evidence from the 1968, 1980, and 1992 Elections,” Journal of Theoretical Politics 9: 167–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paldam, M. 1991. “How Robust Is the Vote Function? A Study of 17 Countries Over Four Decades,” in Economics and Politics: The Calculus of Support, Norpoth, H., Lewis-Beck, M. S., and Lafay, J.-D. (eds.). Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, pp. 9–31.Google Scholar
Paldam, M. 1997. “Political Business Cycles,” in Perspectives on Public Choice: A Handbook, ed. D. Mueller. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 342–70.Google Scholar
Pattie, C. J., and Johnston, R. J.. 2001. “Routes to Party Choice: Ideology, Economic Evaluations and Voting at the 1997 British General Election,” European Journal of Political Research 39: 373–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Popkin, S. 1991. The Reasoning Voter. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Powell, G. B. Jr. 2000. Elections as Instruments of Democracy. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Powell, G. B.., and Whitten, B. G.. 1993. “A Cross-National Analysis of Economic Voting: Taking Account of the Political Context,” American Journal of Political Science 37: 391–414.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Price, S., and Sanders, D.. 1993. “Modeling Government Popularity in Postwar Britain: A Methodological Example,” American Journal of Political Science 37: 317–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Price, S., and Sanders, D.. 1994. “Party Support and Economic Perceptions in the UK: A Two-Level Approach,” in British Elections and Parties Yearbook, eds. D. Broughton et al. London: Frank Cass, pp. 46–72.Google Scholar
Przeworski, A., and Teune, H.. 1970. The Logic of Comparative Social Inquiry. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Rabinowitz, G., and MacDonald, S.. 1989. “A Directional Theory of Issue Voting,” American Political Science Review 83: 93–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reif, K. (ed.). 1984. European Elections 1979/81 and 1984. Conclusion and Perspectives from Empirical Research. Berlin: Quorum.Google Scholar
Reif, K., and Schmitt, H.. 1980. “Nine Second-Order National Elections. A Conceptual Framework for the Analysis of European Election Results,” European Journal for Political Research 8: 3–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robinson, W. S. 1950. “Ecological Correlations and the Behavior of Individuals,” American Sociological Review 15: 351–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Royed, T. J., Leyden, K. M., and Borrelli, S. A.. 2000. “Is ‘Clarity of Responsibility’ Important for Economic Voting? Revisiting Powell and Whitten's Hypothesis,” British Journal of Political Science 30: 669–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sanders, D. 1996. “Economic Performance, Management Competence and the Outcome of the Next General Election,” Political Studies 44: 203–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sanders, D. 1999. “Conservative Incompetence, Labour Responsibility, and the Feelgood Factor: Why the Economy Failed to Save the Conservatives in 1997,” Electoral Studies 18: 251–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Saris, W. E. (ed.). 1988. Variation in Response Function: A Source of Measurement Error. Amsterdam: SRF.Google Scholar
Sartori, G. 1976. Parties and Party Systems. A Framework for Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Schmitt, H., and K. Reif. 2003. “Der Hauptwahlzyklus und die Ergebnisse von Nebenwahlen: Konzeptuelle und empirische Rekonstruktionen am Beispiel der Europawahlen in Wahlzyklus der Bundesrepublik,” in Politbarometer, Wuest, A. M. (ed.). Opladen: Leske und Budrich, pp. 239–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schmitt, H., and Thomassen, J. (eds.) 1999. Political Representation and Legitimacy in the European Union. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sniderman, P. M. 1993. “The New Look in Public Opinion Research,” in Political Science: The State of the Discipline II, Finifter, A. W. (ed.). Washington, DC: The American Political Science Association, pp. 219–45.Google Scholar
Sniderman, P. M., Brody, R. A., and Tetlock, P. E. (eds.). 1991. Reasoning and Choice: Explorations in Political Psychology. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Snijders, T. A. B., and Bosker, R. J.. 1999. Multilevel Analysis. An Introduction to Basic and Advanced Multilevel Modeling. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Steenbergen, M. R., and Jones, B. S.. 2002. “Modeling Multilevel Data Structures,” American Journal of Political Science 46: 218–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stevenson, R. T. (2002). “The Economy as Context: Indirect Links Between the Economy and Voters,” in Economic Voting, Dorussen, H. and Taylor, M. (eds.). London: Routledge, pp. 45–65.Google Scholar
Stimson, J. A. 1985. “Regression in Space and Time: A Statistical Essay,” American Journal of Political Science 29: 914–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stoker, L., and J. Bowers. 2002. “Designing Multi-Level Studies: Sampling Voters and Electoral Contexts,” in The Future of Election Studies, Franklin, M. and Wlezien, C. (eds.). Amsterdam: Pergamon, pp. 77–110.Google Scholar
Thomassen, J. (ed.)., 2005. The European Voter. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tillie, J. 1995. Party Utility and Voting Behavior. Amsterdam: Het Spinhuis.Google Scholar
Train, K. E. 2003. Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Treisman, D., and Gimpelson, V.. 2001. “Political Business Cycles and Russian Elections, or the Manipulations of ‘Chudar,’British Journal of Political Science 31: 225–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tufte, E. 1978. Political Control of the Economy. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Visser, J., and Hemerijck, A.. 1997. A Dutch Miracle: Job Growth, Welfare Reform and Corporatism in the Netherlands. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whitten, G., and Palmer, H. D.. 1999. “Cross-National Analyses of Economic Voting,” Electoral Studies 18: 49–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilkin, S., Haller, B., and Norpoth, H.. 1997. “From Argentina to Zambia – A World-Wide Test of Economic Voting,” Electoral Studies 16: 301–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wlezien, C. 1995. “The Public as Thermostat: Dynamics of Preferences for Spending,” American Journal of Political Science 39: 981–1000.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wlezien, C. 2004. “Patterns of Representation: Dynamics of Public Preferences and Policy,” The Journal of Politics 66: 1–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wlezien, C., and Erikson, R. S.. 2002. “The Timeline of Presidential Election Campaigns,” The Journal of Politics 64: 969–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wlezien, C., Franklin, M., and Twiggs, D.. 1997. “Economic Perceptions and Vote Choice: Disentangling the Endogeneity,” Political Behavior 19: 7–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zaller, J. R. 1992. The Nature and Origins of Mass Opinion. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zaller, J. R. 2002. “The Statistical Power of Election Studies to Detect Media Exposure Effects in Political Campaigns,” Electoral Studies 21: 297–329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zaller, J. R. 2005. “Floating Voters in U.S. Presidential Elections 1948–2000,” in Studies in Public Opinion: Attitudes, Nonattitudes, Measurement Error, and Change, Saris, W. E. and Sniderman, P. M. (eds.). Princeton: Princeton University Press, pp. 166–214.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×