About: Electoral Studies is an academic journal published by Elsevier BV. The journal publishes majorly in the area(s): Voting & General election. It has an ISSN identifier of 0261-3794. Over the lifetime, 2558 publications have been published receiving 69054 citations.
Papers published on a yearly basis
TL;DR: For instance, the authors found that the value of a personal reputation rises if the electoral formula itself fosters personal vote-seeking, but falls if it fosters party reputation-seeking.
Abstract: Seat allocation formulas affect candidates' incentives to campaign on a personal rather than party reputation. Variables that enhance personal vote-seeking include: (1) lack of party leadership control over access to and rank on ballots, (2) degree to which candidates are elected on individual votes independent of co-partisans, and (3) whether voters cast a single intra-party vote instead of multiple votes or a party-level vote. District magnitude has the unusual feature that, as it increases, the value of a personal reputation rises if the electoral formula itself fosters personal vote-seeking, but falls if the electoral formula fosters party reputation-seeking.
TL;DR: Different PR methods should be seen not as being more proportional or less proportional than each other but as embodying different ideas as to what maximizing proportionality means and, by extension, what minimizing disproportionality means as discussed by the authors.
Abstract: Different PR methods should be seen not as being more proportional or less proportional than each other but as embodying different ideas as to what maximizing proportionality means and, by extension, what minimizing disproportionality means. Each of the main methods of PR (d'Hondt, Sainte-Lague, largest remainders) generates its own index of proportionality and, thus, its own way of measuring disproportionality. Applying these indices to competitive elections of the period 1979–1989 shows a high correlation between the rankings produced by the various methods, but the ordering of countries is sufficiently different to require a choice to be made between the indices.
TL;DR: In this paper, an update to Golder's (2005) Democratic Electoral Systems (DES) dataset was presented, which includes all legislative and presidential elections that took place in democratic states from 2001 to 2011.
Abstract: This research note describes an update to Golder's (2005) Democratic Electoral Systems (DES) dataset. We extend the temporal scope of the original dataset by including all legislative and presidential elections that took place in democratic states from 2001 to 2011. In addition to significantly expanding the size of the DES dataset, we offer a simplified classification scheme for electoral systems. We also provide more detailed information about all democratic elections since 1946, including the dates for each round of elections as well as the rules used in different electoral tiers. A brief temporal and geographic overview of the data is presented.
TL;DR: In this article, the authors present a meta-analysis of 83 aggregate-level studies on voter turnout, focusing on the effect of socio-economic, political, and institutional variables.
Abstract: The amount of scholarly attention directed at resolving the question why people turn out to cast a vote is vast. In a research field dominated by empirical studies e such as the one on voter turnout e an overview of where we stand and what we know is not superfluous. Therefore, the present paper reviews and assesses the empirical evidence brought forward through a meta-analysis of 83 aggregate-level studies. We thereby concentrate on the effect of socio-economic, political and institutional variables. The results argue for the introduction of a ‘core’ model of voter turnout e including, among other elements, population size and election closeness e that can be used as a starting point for extending our knowledge on why people vote.
TL;DR: More than 200 relevant books and papers have been published in the last 10 years as mentioned in this paper, and the main findings from this literature can be found in Table 1, where the main focus is on the main reasons why voting has shown notendency to die.
Abstract: The group does not include everybody active in the ﬁeld,but they are the lion’s share of the leaders. Still, we are sure that there are newresearchers in the ﬁeld, whom we will soon learn about, hopefully as a result of thisscholarly exchange. Our volume is a sequel to Norpoth et al. (1991), based upon asimilar conference roughly 10 years before ours.Economic voting is a ﬁeld that mixes economics and political science and doesso by means of econometrics. Political scientists analyze elections, and economistsroutinely use macro welfare functions, with little empirical basis. Further, for thepolitical scientist it is wonderful to have explanatory variables that are well known,carefully collected and quantitative. For the economist, voting forms an importantlimiting case where people decide while having only a small and “intangible” interestin the outcome. Hence, it is no surprise that the subject has attracted many researchersfrom both disciplines. Indeed, more than 200 relevant books and papers have beenpublished. The main ﬁndings from this literature are summarized in Table 1.The last item on the list reveals the main reason why this research has shown notendency to die. Many nice VP-functions have been found over the years, only tosuddenly disappear. Several such relations exist in the social sciences (the Phillips