Shifts of meaning within explanations of voting and party competition

Ian Budge, Dennis Farlie, Michael Laver

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    Abstract

    Rational choice models are increasingly used in explanations of voting and elections. Their adoption is often urged, rather uncritically, on the grounds that they provide a unified and exact explanation across political science. Far from doing so, however, their definitions of 'rationality' may differ radically even within a limited area, such as party and voting behaviour. Shifts of meaning from one model to another may be obscured by mathematical formalism, which concentrates attention on the derivation of conclusions from basic assumptions, rather than on the practical relevance of their relationship to the assumptions behind other models. A mathematical formulation may not, however, be the most relevant for purposes of electoral explanation. Rigorous verbal formulations can represent electors' and politicians' decision procedures more realistically, while remaining generally accessible and supporting detailed inter-comparisons of their working assumptions. Through these, rational choice explanations can be brought closer together and decisions between them made with a clear knowledge of what is involved, thus providing a better basis for cumulative research. The process of theoretical evaluation and assimilation is illustrated here with two original theories of voting and party competition.

    Original languageEnglish (US)
    Pages (from-to)23-38
    Number of pages16
    JournalElectoral Studies
    Volume2
    Issue number1
    DOIs
    StatePublished - 1983

    Fingerprint

    voting
    voting behavior
    assimilation
    political science
    rationality
    politician
    election
    evaluation

    ASJC Scopus subject areas

    • Sociology and Political Science

    Cite this

    Shifts of meaning within explanations of voting and party competition. / Budge, Ian; Farlie, Dennis; Laver, Michael.

    In: Electoral Studies, Vol. 2, No. 1, 1983, p. 23-38.

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    Budge, Ian ; Farlie, Dennis ; Laver, Michael. / Shifts of meaning within explanations of voting and party competition. In: Electoral Studies. 1983 ; Vol. 2, No. 1. pp. 23-38.
    @article{8dbeeb20fc074c35a75eefe270d4a5ca,
    title = "Shifts of meaning within explanations of voting and party competition",
    abstract = "Rational choice models are increasingly used in explanations of voting and elections. Their adoption is often urged, rather uncritically, on the grounds that they provide a unified and exact explanation across political science. Far from doing so, however, their definitions of 'rationality' may differ radically even within a limited area, such as party and voting behaviour. Shifts of meaning from one model to another may be obscured by mathematical formalism, which concentrates attention on the derivation of conclusions from basic assumptions, rather than on the practical relevance of their relationship to the assumptions behind other models. A mathematical formulation may not, however, be the most relevant for purposes of electoral explanation. Rigorous verbal formulations can represent electors' and politicians' decision procedures more realistically, while remaining generally accessible and supporting detailed inter-comparisons of their working assumptions. Through these, rational choice explanations can be brought closer together and decisions between them made with a clear knowledge of what is involved, thus providing a better basis for cumulative research. The process of theoretical evaluation and assimilation is illustrated here with two original theories of voting and party competition.",
    author = "Ian Budge and Dennis Farlie and Michael Laver",
    year = "1983",
    doi = "10.1016/0261-3794(83)90104-X",
    language = "English (US)",
    volume = "2",
    pages = "23--38",
    journal = "Electoral Studies",
    issn = "0261-3794",
    publisher = "Elsevier BV",
    number = "1",

    }

    TY - JOUR

    T1 - Shifts of meaning within explanations of voting and party competition

    AU - Budge, Ian

    AU - Farlie, Dennis

    AU - Laver, Michael

    PY - 1983

    Y1 - 1983

    N2 - Rational choice models are increasingly used in explanations of voting and elections. Their adoption is often urged, rather uncritically, on the grounds that they provide a unified and exact explanation across political science. Far from doing so, however, their definitions of 'rationality' may differ radically even within a limited area, such as party and voting behaviour. Shifts of meaning from one model to another may be obscured by mathematical formalism, which concentrates attention on the derivation of conclusions from basic assumptions, rather than on the practical relevance of their relationship to the assumptions behind other models. A mathematical formulation may not, however, be the most relevant for purposes of electoral explanation. Rigorous verbal formulations can represent electors' and politicians' decision procedures more realistically, while remaining generally accessible and supporting detailed inter-comparisons of their working assumptions. Through these, rational choice explanations can be brought closer together and decisions between them made with a clear knowledge of what is involved, thus providing a better basis for cumulative research. The process of theoretical evaluation and assimilation is illustrated here with two original theories of voting and party competition.

    AB - Rational choice models are increasingly used in explanations of voting and elections. Their adoption is often urged, rather uncritically, on the grounds that they provide a unified and exact explanation across political science. Far from doing so, however, their definitions of 'rationality' may differ radically even within a limited area, such as party and voting behaviour. Shifts of meaning from one model to another may be obscured by mathematical formalism, which concentrates attention on the derivation of conclusions from basic assumptions, rather than on the practical relevance of their relationship to the assumptions behind other models. A mathematical formulation may not, however, be the most relevant for purposes of electoral explanation. Rigorous verbal formulations can represent electors' and politicians' decision procedures more realistically, while remaining generally accessible and supporting detailed inter-comparisons of their working assumptions. Through these, rational choice explanations can be brought closer together and decisions between them made with a clear knowledge of what is involved, thus providing a better basis for cumulative research. The process of theoretical evaluation and assimilation is illustrated here with two original theories of voting and party competition.

    UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0043116340&partnerID=8YFLogxK

    UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0043116340&partnerID=8YFLogxK

    U2 - 10.1016/0261-3794(83)90104-X

    DO - 10.1016/0261-3794(83)90104-X

    M3 - Article

    AN - SCOPUS:0043116340

    VL - 2

    SP - 23

    EP - 38

    JO - Electoral Studies

    JF - Electoral Studies

    SN - 0261-3794

    IS - 1

    ER -