scholarly journals The Marginal Voter’s Curse*

Author(s):  
Helios Herrera ◽  
Aniol Llorente-Saguer ◽  
Joseph C McMurray

Abstract The swing voter’s curse is useful for explaining patterns of voter participation, but arises because voters restrict attention to the rare event of a pivotal vote. Recent empirical evidence suggests that electoral margins influence policy outcomes, even away from the 50% threshold. If so, voters should also pay attention to the marginal impact of a vote. Adopting this assumption, we find that a marginal voter’s curse gives voters a new reason to abstain, to avoid diluting the pool of information. The two curses have similar origins and exhibit similar patterns, but the marginal voter’s curse is both stronger and more robust. In fact, the swing voter’s curse turns out to be knife-edge: in large elections, a model with both pivotal and marginal considerations and a model with marginal considerations alone generate identical equilibrium behavior.

1998 ◽  
Vol 24 (3) ◽  
pp. 391-419 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joel H. Neuman ◽  
Robert A. Baron

Contrary to the impression generated by an increasing number of news reports in the past several years, the occurrence of workplace violencemextreme acts of aggression involving direct physical assault represents a relatively rare event in work settings. However, workplace aggression--efforts by individuals to harm others with whom they work or have worked---are much more prevalent and may prove extremely damaging to individuals and organizations. This paper presents empirical evidence on the varied forms of workplace aggression and their relative frequency of occurrence in work settings. We offer a theoretical framework for understanding this phenomenon---one based on contemporary theories of human aggression----and demonstrate how principles associated with this framework may be applied to the management and prevention of all forms of aggression in workplaces.


Author(s):  
Seth J. Hill

Abstract Many believe primary elections distort representation in American legislatures because unrepresentative actors nominate extremist candidates. Advocates have reformed primaries to broaden voter participation and increase representation. Empirical evidence, however, is quite variable on the effects of reform. I argue that when institutional reform narrows one pathway of political influence, aggrieved actors take political action elsewhere to circumvent reform. I use a difference-in-differences design in the American states and find that although changing primary rules increases primary turnout, campaign contributions also increase with reform. Implementing nonpartisan primaries and reforming partisan primaries lead to estimated 9 and 21 percent increases in individual campaign contributions per cycle. This suggests actors substitute action across avenues of political influence to limit effects of institutional reform.


2018 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 121-138
Author(s):  
W. S. Navin Perera

The prime lending rate is the rate at which commercial banks loan funds to their most creditworthy customers, and hence, is usually lower than other market lending rates; reason why it is considered a “base or reference rate”. In Sri Lanka, the Central Bank of Sri Lanka (CBSL) has been compiling the Average Weighted Prime Lending Rate (AWPR) since January 1986. This paper examines the determinants of prime lending rates in Sri Lanka using weekly data from January 2004 to June 2013, while attempting to capture any asymmetries in prime rate changes to monetary policy decisions. Empirical evidence suggests that the prime rate is highly persistent, while the call money rate also remains a key determinant. However, domestic liquidity was statistically insignificant and even if it was, it has only a marginal impact in determining the prime lending rate. Furthermore, there is also evidence of asymmetric adjustment in AWPR.


This is the comprehensively revised second edition of a volume that was welcomed at its first appearance as ‘the most authoritative survey and critique of the welfare state yet published’. Of its fifty-one chapters, some chapters are brand new; all have been systematically revised, and they are all right up to date. The first seven sections of the book cover the themes of ethics, history, approaches, inputs and actors, policies, policy outcomes, and worlds of welfare. A final chapter is devoted to the future of welfare and well-being under the imperatives of climate change. Every chapter is written in a way that is both comprehensive and succinct, introducing the novice reader to the essentials of what is going on, while providing new insights for the more experienced researcher. Wherever appropriate, the handbook brings the very latest empirical evidence to bear. It is a book that is thoroughly comparative in every way.


2019 ◽  
pp. 213-228
Author(s):  
Rachel VanSickle-Ward ◽  
Kevin Wallsten

Chapter 10 synthesizes the empirical evidence presented in preceding chapters and explains the significance of these findings for women’s voices in political debate more broadly. More specifically, this chapter marshals the data described in chapters 2 through 9 to answer the three central questions posed in the beginning book: Who speaks? What do they say? Does it matter? This chapter argues that the presence or absence of female politicians, reporters, activists, and judges has dramatic consequences for the timing, tone, and trajectory of public debates and policy outcomes on birth control. Additionally, this chapter considers how lingering debates over contraception coverage, and the persistent disparities in who speaks and who is heard, will inform our expectations about gender and politics in the years to come.


Author(s):  
Brandon Valeriano ◽  
Benjamin Jensen ◽  
Ryan C. Maness

This book examines how states integrate cyber capabilities with other instruments of power to achieve foreign policy outcomes. Given North Korea’s use of cyber intrusions to threaten the international community and extort funds for its elites, Chinese espionage and the theft of government records through the Office of Personal Management (OPM) hack, and the Russian hack on the 2016 US election, this book is a timely contribution to debates about power and influence in the 21st century. Its goal is to understand how states apply cyber means to achieve political ends, a topic speculated and imagined, but investigated with very little analytical rigor. Following on Valeriano and Maness’s (2015) book, Cyber War versus Cyber Realities: Cyber Conflict in the International System, this new study explores how states apply cyber strategies, using empirical evidence and key theoretical insights largely missed by the academic and strategy community. It investigates cyber strategies in their integrated and isolated contexts, demonstrating that they are useful to managing escalation and sending ambiguous signals, but generally they fail to achieve coercive effect.


2016 ◽  
Vol 110 (4) ◽  
pp. 750-762 ◽  
Author(s):  
LUCAS LEEMANN ◽  
FABIO WASSERFALLEN

A key requirement of democratic governance is that policy outcomes and the majority preference of the electorate are congruent. Many studies argue that the more direct democratic a system is, the more often voters get what they want, but the empirical evidence is mixed. This analysis explores the democratic effect of initiatives and referendums theoretically and empirically. The prediction of the formal model is that “bad” representation (i.e., a large preference deviation between the electorate and the political elite) is good for the democratic effect of direct democracy. An empirical investigation of original voter and elite survey data, analyzed with multilevel modeling and poststratification, supports this argument. Building on the literature, the findings of the analysis suggest that the extent to which direct democratic institutions are conducive for policy congruence—and may thus be advisable as democratic correctives to representative systems—depends on the political conflict structure.


Author(s):  
Céline Colombo ◽  
Hanspeter Kriesi

We start by tracing the origins of modern-day direct democracy back to the ideas of participatory democrats, and we give a systematic overview of the different forms of direct democratic practices existing today, as well as of the main criticisms of direct democracy. Next, we review existing empirical evidence on some of the crucial debates surrounding direct democracy: Does direct democracy lead to systematically different policy outcomes and to a better representation of voters? Do popular votes hurt minority rights? To what extent does direct democracy undermine the relevance of, and participation in, elections? Are citizens competent enough to decide over policy at the ballot box? What is the role of the elite and of campaigns in direct democracy? Finally, we discuss the controversial relation between direct democracy and populism.


2016 ◽  
Vol 47 (2) ◽  
pp. 156-182 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephen Langfur

Husserl offers insight into the constituting of the self-aware ego through time-consciousness. Yet his account does not satisfactorily explain how this ego can experience itself as presently acting. Furthermore, although he acknowledges that the Now is not a knife-edge present, he does not show what determines its duration. These shortfalls and others are overcome through a change of starting point. Citing empirical evidence, I take it as a basic given that when a caregiver frontally engages an infant of two months or so, the infant is aware of a person attending. The attending, I propose, is experienced by the infant as having an implicit target, a focal center. In the infant’s awareness, the carer’s focal center is the self. When a You is perceived as attending, a self is apperceived. I argue that such dependence on a You’s attending continues lifelong in derivative forms. I explore the idea that original time is a partial oscillation of awareness between the perceived You and the apperceived self. I then show how, from this oscillation, the ordinary experience of time is derived.


2012 ◽  
Vol 45 (03) ◽  
pp. 428-434 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael R. Wolf ◽  
J. Cherie Strachan ◽  
Daniel M. Shea

Political observers have detected a noticeable uptick in American political incivility in recent years, culminating with several moderate senators recently citing the rise of hard-core partisanship as the reason for their retirement. Supporting these accusations of unprecedented incivility with empirical evidence can be difficult, as notions of what constitutes appropriate, civil behavior are subjective and can vary across the political context of different eras. Was it more uncivil, for example, for William Jennings Bryan to accuse his political opponents of crucifying other Americans on a cross of gold than it was for a member of Congress to yell “You lie!” at the president in the nation's Capitol? Assessing the incivility of these statements requires determining the effect each had on political opponents' abilities to maintain a functional relationship despite their disagreement over policy outcomes. Nevertheless, many politicians, political observers, and scholars are truly concerned that current levels of incivility are indeed worse, not only damaging the ability to resolve complex public problems, but threatening the long-term stability of America's governing institutions. Largely focusing on changes in institutional structures and elite behavior, scholars identify numerous explanations for this trend.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document