Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-564cf476b6-qq8pn Total loading time: 0.326 Render date: 2021-06-21T23:06:55.237Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "metricsAbstractViews": false, "figures": true, "newCiteModal": false, "newCitedByModal": true, "newEcommerce": true }

Hunting the Snark: A Reply to “Re-Evaluating Valence Models of Political Choice”*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 December 2015

Abstract

This paper responds to Evans and Kat’s critique of the valence politics model of electoral choice. Their critique is deficient in several respects. First, the authors do not test the valence politics model, which is motivated by a theory of voting rather than a claim about the relationship between generalized measures of “party preference” and “party performance.” Second, Evans and Kat do not provide theoretical grounding for partisanship, which they claim is strongly exogenous to other variables of interest. Third, there are several specification and testing problems with their structural equation model. We study the properties of the valence model using a vector error correction model of aggregate monthly survey data gathered throughout the New Labour Era. Consistent with theoretical expectations, key valence politics variables constitute a powerful cointegrated system in which the dynamics of partisanship are endogenous to other variables in the system.

Type
Original Articles
Copyright
© The European Political Science Association 2015 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below.

Footnotes

*

Paul Whiteley is a Professor in the Department of Government, University of Essex Wivenhoe Park, Colchester, Essex, CO4 3SQ. Harold Clarke is the Ashbell Smith Professor of Political Science, School of Economic, Political and Policy Sciences, University of Texas at Dallas, Richardson, TX 75080, Texas, USA. David Sanders is the Regius Professor of Government, in the Department of Government at the University of Essex, Wivenhoe Park, Colchester, CO4 3SQ. Marianne Stewart is a Professor of Political Science in the School of Economic, Political and Policy Sciences, University of Texas at Dallas, Richardson, TX 75080, Texas, USA.

References

Achen, Christopher. 1992. ‘Social Psychology, Demographic Variables, and Linear Regression: Breaking the Iron Triangle in Voting Research’. Political Behavior 14:195211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Achen, Christopher. 2005. ‘Let’s Put Garbage-Can Regressions and Garbage-Can Probits Where They Belong’. Conflict Management and Peace Science 22:327339.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Adams, James F., Merrill III, Samuel, and Grofman, Bernard. 2005. A Unified Theory of Party Competition. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Andersen, Robert, and Evans, Geoffrey. 2006. ‘The Powerful Impact of Party Leaders: How Blair Cost Labour Votes’. Parliamentary Affairs 58:818836.Google Scholar
Black, Duncan. 1958. The Theory of Committees and Elections. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Bollen, Kenneth A. 1989. Structural Equations with Latent Variables. New York: Wiley.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bollen, Kenneth A. and Davis, Walter R.. 2009. ‘Two Rules of Identification for Structural Equation Models’. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal 16:523536.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Butler, David, and Stokes, Donald. 1969. Political Change in Britain: Forces Shaping Electoral Choice. New York, NY: St. Martin’s Press.Google Scholar
Butler, David, and Stokes, Donald. 1974. Political Change in Britain: Forces Shaping Electoral Choice, 2nd ed. London: Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campbell, Angus, Gurin, Gerald, and Miller, Warren. 1954. The Voter Decides. New York, NY: Row Peterson.Google Scholar
Campbell, Angus, Converse, Philip, Miller, Warren, and Stokes, Donald. 1960. The American Voter. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
Carroll, Lewis. 1876. The Hunting of the Snark. London: Macmillan and Co.Google Scholar
Charezma, Wojciech W., and Deadman, Derek F.. 1997. New Directions in Econometric Practice. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
Clarke, Harold D., Kornberg, Allan, and Scotto, Thomas J.. 2009. Making Political Choices: Canada and the United States. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
Clarke, Harold D., and McCutcheon, Allan. 2009. ‘The Dynamics of Party Identification Reconsidered’. Public Opinion Quarterly 73:704728.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clarke, Harold. D., Sanders, David, Stewart, Marianne C., and Whiteley, Paul. 2004. Political Choice in Britain. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clarke, Harold. D., Sanders, David, Stewart, Marianne C., and Whiteley, Paul. 2009. Performance Politics and the British Voter. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clarke, Harold D., and Whitten, Guy D.. 2013. ‘Hard Choices in Hard Times: Valence Voting in Germany 2009’. Electoral Studies 32:445451.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clarke, Harold D., Ho, Karl, and Stewart, Marianne C.. 2000. ‘Major’s Lesser (Not Minor) Effects: Prime Ministerial Approval and Governing Party Support in Britain Since 1979’. Electoral Studies 18:255274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clarke, Harold, Stewart, Marianne, and Whiteley, Paul. 1998. ‘New Models For New Labour: The Political Economy of Labour Party Support, January 1992-April 1997’. American Political Science Review 92:559576.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clarke, Judith A., and Mirza, Sadaf. 2006. ‘A Comparison of Some Common Methods for Detecting Granger Noncausality’. Journal of Statistical Computing and Simulation 76:207231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Conlisk, John. 1996. ‘Why Bounded Rationality?’. Journal of Economic Literature 34:669700.Google Scholar
Converse, Philip E. 1969. ‘Of Time and Partisan Stability’. Comparative Political Studies 2:139172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dickey, David, and Fuller, Wayne A.. 1979. ‘Distribution of the Estimates for Autoregressive Time Series with a Unit Root’. Journal of the American Statistical Association 74:427431.Google Scholar
Duch, Raymond, and Stevenson, Randy. 2008. The Economic Vote: How Political and Economic Institutions Condition Election Results. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Downs, Anthony. 1957. An Economic Theory of Democracy. New York, NY: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
Enders, Walter. 2010. Applied Econometric Time-Series. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
Engle, Robert F., and Granger, Clive W. J.. 1987. ‘Cointegration and Error-Correction: Representation, Estimation and Testing’. Econometrica 55:251276.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Evans, Geoffrey, and Andersen, Robert. 2003. ‘Who Blairs Wins: Leadership and Voting in the 2001 Election’. British Elections & Parties Review 13:229247.Google Scholar
Evans, Geoffrey and Chzhen, Kat. 2013. ‘Re-evaluating the Valence Model of Political Choice’. Political Science and Research Methods, doi: 10.1017/psrm.2013.11.Google Scholar
Fair, Ray. 2004. Estimating How the Macroeconomy Works. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Fiorina, Morris. 1981. Retrospective Voting in American National Elections. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Franklin, Charles H. 1992. ‘Measurement and the Dynamics of Party Identification’. Political Behavior 14:297309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Franklin, Charles H., and Jackson, John E.. 1983. ‘The Dynamics of Party Identification’. American Political Science Review 77:957973.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gigerenzer, Gerd. 2008. Rationality for Mortals: How People Cope with Uncertainty. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Gigerenzer, Gerd, Hertwig, Ralph, and Pachur, Thorsten. (eds) 2011. Heuristics: The Foundations of Adaptive Behavior. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Giles, David. 2011. ‘VAR or VECM When Testing for Granger Causality’. Available at http://davegiles.blogspot.ca/2011/10/var-or-vecm-when-testing-for granger.html, accessed 2 March 2014.Google Scholar
Gilovich, Thomas, Griffin, Dale, and Kahneman, Daniel. 2002. Heuristics and Biases: The Psychology of Intuitive Judgment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Granger, Clive. 1969. ‘Investigating Causal Relations by Econometric Models and Cross-Spectral Methods’. Econometrica 3:424438.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Granger, Clive W. J., and Newbold, Paul. 1974. ‘Spurious Regressions in Econometrics’. Journal of Econometrics 2:111120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Green, Donald P., Palmquist, Bradley, and Schickler, Eric. 2002. Partisan Hearts & Minds: Political Parties and the Social Identities of Voters. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Greene, William H. 2003. Econometric Analysis, 5th ed. New York, NY: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
Hagenaars, Jacques, and McCutcheon, Allan. 2002. Applied Latent Class Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ho, Karl, Clarke, Harold D., Chen, Li-Khan, and Weng, Dennis Lu-Chung. 2013. ‘Valence Politics and Electoral Choice in a New Democracy: The Case of Taiwan’. Electoral Studies 32:476481.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johansen, Soren. 1991. ‘Estimation and Hypothesis Testing of Cointegration Vectors in Gaussian Vector Autoregressive Models’. Econometrica 59:15511580.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johansen, Soren. 1996. Likelihood-Based Inference in Cointegrated Vector Autoregressive Models. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Juselius, Katarina. 2006. The Cointegrated VAR Model: Methodology and Applications. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Kahneman, Daniel. 2011. Thinking Fast and Slow. New York, NY: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.Google Scholar
Kahneman, Daniel, Slovic, Paul, and Tversky, Amos (eds) 1982. Judgment Under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kwiatkowski, Dennis, Phillips, Peter, Schmidt, Peter, and Shin, Yongcheoi. 1992. ‘Testing the Null Hypothesis of Stationarity Against the Alternative of a United Root: How Sure Are We That Economic Time Series Have a Unit Root?’. Journal of Econometrics 54:159178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lewis-Beck, Michael S. 1988. Economics and Elections: The Major Western Democracies. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
Lupia, Arthur. 1994. ‘Shortcuts Versus Encyclopedias: Voting in California Insurance Reform Elections’. American Political Science Review 88:6376.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lupia, Arthur, and McCubbins, Matthew. 1998. The Democratic Dilemma: Can Citizens Learn What They Really Need to Know? New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Lupia, Arthur, McCubbins, Matthew, and Popkin, Samuel (eds) 2000. Elements of Reason: Cognition, Choice and the Bounds of Rationality. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Merrill, Samuel III, and Grofman, Bernard. 1999. A Unified Theory of Voting: Directional Proximity Spatial Models. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Neundorf, Anja, Stegmueller, Daniel, and Scotto, Thomas J.. 2011. ‘The Individual-Level Dynamics of Bounded Partisanship’. Public Opinion Quarterly 75:458482.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pesaran, M. Hashem, and Shin, Yongcheol. 1998. ‘Generalized Impulse Response Analysis in Linear Multivariate Models’. Economics Letters 58:1729.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Popkin, Samuel. 1991. The Reasoning Voter: Communication and Persuasion in Presidential Campaigns. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Pulzer, Peter. 1967. Political Representation and Elections in Britain. London: Allen and Unwin.Google Scholar
Sanders, David, Clarke, Harold D., Stewart, Marianne C., and Whiteley, Paul. 2007. ‘Does Mode Matter for Modeling Political Choice? Evidence from the 2005 British Election Study’. Political Analysis 15:257285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sanders, David, Clarke, Harold D., Stewart, Marianne C., and Whiteley, Paul. 2008. ‘The Endogeneity of Preferences in Spatial Models: Evidence from the 2005 British Election Study’. Journal of Elections, Public Opinion and Parties 18:413431.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sims, Christopher. 1980. ‘Macroeconomics and Reality’. Econometrica 48:148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sniderman, Paul M., Brody, Richard A., and Tetlock, Phillip E. (eds) 1991. Reasoning and Choice: Explorations in Political Psychology. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stokes, Donald E. 1963. ‘Spatial Models of Party Competition’. American Political Science Review 57:368377.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stokes, Donald E.. 1992. ‘Valence Politics’. In Dennis Kavanagh (ed.), Electoral Politics. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 141164.Google Scholar
Toda, Hiro Y., and Yamamoto, Taku. 1995. ‘Statistical Inference in Vector Autoregressions with Possibly Integrated Processes’. Journal of Econometrics 66:225250.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van de Pol, Frank, and Langeheine, Rolf. 1990. ‘Mixed Markov Latent Class Models’. In C. C. Clogg (ed.), Sociological Methodology 20:213247.Google Scholar
Weisberg, Herbert. 1980. ‘A Multidimensional Conceptualization of Party Identification’. Political Behavior 2:3360.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whiteley, Paul, Clarke, Harold D., Sanders, David, and Stewart, Marianne C.. 2013. Affluence, Austerity and Electoral Change in Britain. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9
Cited by

Linked content

Please note a has been issued for this article.

Send article to Kindle

To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@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 sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent 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.

Hunting the Snark: A Reply to “Re-Evaluating Valence Models of Political Choice”*
Available formats
×

Send article to Dropbox

To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and 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 <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

Hunting the Snark: A Reply to “Re-Evaluating Valence Models of Political Choice”*
Available formats
×

Send article to Google Drive

To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and 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 <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

Hunting the Snark: A Reply to “Re-Evaluating Valence Models of Political Choice”*
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Please enter your response.

Your details

Please enter a valid email address.

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *