Identification, Agreement and Government Performance: The Relative Impact on Voting*
- 1 September 1981
- journal article
- Published by Wiley in Scandinavian Political Studies
- Vol. 4 (3) , 221-252
- https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9477.1981.tb00424.x
Abstract
Debating explanations of electoral behavior, American scholars have focused on three main theories: The identification model relying on underlying loyalty of voters towards specific parties; the political agreement or proximity model assuming a rational calculation of parties' ideological positions or stand on salient political issues as the yardstick for choice of party; and the investment model relying on voters' ability to calculate which government alternative will bring most utility for the individual voter. Examining these theories with the use of Norwegian data from the elections of 1965, 1969 and 1977, we find that the identification model is far the most powerful in predicting individual voting behavior. This model also has an edge in explaining support for the individual parties and the total distribution of voters. However, at the major postwar government election in 1965, the investment model certainly is of importance, and at the election in 1977 the significance of the proximity model has increased.Keywords
This publication has 6 references indexed in Scilit:
- Presidential Influence on Congressional Appropriations DecisionsAmerican Journal of Political Science, 1988
- A Majority Party in Disarray: Policy Polarization in the 1972 ElectionAmerican Political Science Review, 1976
- Comment: What Have You Done for Me Lately? Toward An Investment Theory of VotingAmerican Political Science Review, 1976
- Comment on “A Majority Party in Disarray”American Political Science Review, 1976
- Comment: Political Methodologies in Disarray: Some Alternative Interpretations of the 1972 ElectionAmerican Political Science Review, 1976
- Ideology in the 1972 Election: Myth or Reality—A RejoinderAmerican Political Science Review, 1976