Testing the power of arguments in referendums: A Bradley-Terry approach

Peter John Loewen, Daniel Rubenson, Arthur Spirling

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    Abstract

    How can we determine which arguments in a referendum are most persuasive? We show that the Bradley-Terry model has several features that make it well-suited to this task, and thus preferable to other, more conventional approaches. Using a survey experiment conducted during an electoral reform referendum in Ontario, Canada in October 2007, we demonstrate how unstructured and structured Bradley-Terry models can be straightforwardly fitted and interpreted. In doing so, we gain insight into the factors which determine support for electoral reform. We identify a status quo bias and find that power varies with mention of fairness, local control over candidate selection, and the role of political parties. We conclude by discussing the limits, extensions and further applications of such models in electoral studies and political science more broadly.

    Original languageEnglish (US)
    Pages (from-to)212-221
    Number of pages10
    JournalElectoral Studies
    Volume31
    Issue number1
    DOIs
    StatePublished - Mar 2012

    Fingerprint

    referendum
    reform
    fairness
    political science
    candidacy
    Canada
    experiment
    trend

    Keywords

    • Bradley-Terry models
    • Elections
    • Methods
    • Public opinion
    • Referendums

    ASJC Scopus subject areas

    • Political Science and International Relations

    Cite this

    Testing the power of arguments in referendums : A Bradley-Terry approach. / Loewen, Peter John; Rubenson, Daniel; Spirling, Arthur.

    In: Electoral Studies, Vol. 31, No. 1, 03.2012, p. 212-221.

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    Loewen, Peter John ; Rubenson, Daniel ; Spirling, Arthur. / Testing the power of arguments in referendums : A Bradley-Terry approach. In: Electoral Studies. 2012 ; Vol. 31, No. 1. pp. 212-221.
    @article{114202ff3c1b49a3bc54da5bd521415d,
    title = "Testing the power of arguments in referendums: A Bradley-Terry approach",
    abstract = "How can we determine which arguments in a referendum are most persuasive? We show that the Bradley-Terry model has several features that make it well-suited to this task, and thus preferable to other, more conventional approaches. Using a survey experiment conducted during an electoral reform referendum in Ontario, Canada in October 2007, we demonstrate how unstructured and structured Bradley-Terry models can be straightforwardly fitted and interpreted. In doing so, we gain insight into the factors which determine support for electoral reform. We identify a status quo bias and find that power varies with mention of fairness, local control over candidate selection, and the role of political parties. We conclude by discussing the limits, extensions and further applications of such models in electoral studies and political science more broadly.",
    keywords = "Bradley-Terry models, Elections, Methods, Public opinion, Referendums",
    author = "Loewen, {Peter John} and Daniel Rubenson and Arthur Spirling",
    year = "2012",
    month = "3",
    doi = "10.1016/j.electstud.2011.07.003",
    language = "English (US)",
    volume = "31",
    pages = "212--221",
    journal = "Electoral Studies",
    issn = "0261-3794",
    publisher = "Elsevier BV",
    number = "1",

    }

    TY - JOUR

    T1 - Testing the power of arguments in referendums

    T2 - A Bradley-Terry approach

    AU - Loewen, Peter John

    AU - Rubenson, Daniel

    AU - Spirling, Arthur

    PY - 2012/3

    Y1 - 2012/3

    N2 - How can we determine which arguments in a referendum are most persuasive? We show that the Bradley-Terry model has several features that make it well-suited to this task, and thus preferable to other, more conventional approaches. Using a survey experiment conducted during an electoral reform referendum in Ontario, Canada in October 2007, we demonstrate how unstructured and structured Bradley-Terry models can be straightforwardly fitted and interpreted. In doing so, we gain insight into the factors which determine support for electoral reform. We identify a status quo bias and find that power varies with mention of fairness, local control over candidate selection, and the role of political parties. We conclude by discussing the limits, extensions and further applications of such models in electoral studies and political science more broadly.

    AB - How can we determine which arguments in a referendum are most persuasive? We show that the Bradley-Terry model has several features that make it well-suited to this task, and thus preferable to other, more conventional approaches. Using a survey experiment conducted during an electoral reform referendum in Ontario, Canada in October 2007, we demonstrate how unstructured and structured Bradley-Terry models can be straightforwardly fitted and interpreted. In doing so, we gain insight into the factors which determine support for electoral reform. We identify a status quo bias and find that power varies with mention of fairness, local control over candidate selection, and the role of political parties. We conclude by discussing the limits, extensions and further applications of such models in electoral studies and political science more broadly.

    KW - Bradley-Terry models

    KW - Elections

    KW - Methods

    KW - Public opinion

    KW - Referendums

    UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84857236813&partnerID=8YFLogxK

    UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84857236813&partnerID=8YFLogxK

    U2 - 10.1016/j.electstud.2011.07.003

    DO - 10.1016/j.electstud.2011.07.003

    M3 - Article

    VL - 31

    SP - 212

    EP - 221

    JO - Electoral Studies

    JF - Electoral Studies

    SN - 0261-3794

    IS - 1

    ER -