Are political parties rational actors?
Best insight from top research papers
Political parties can be strategic and vote-maximizing actors, but their ability to adapt to new electoral systems is influenced by factors such as organizational and electoral strength, experience with the new system, and availability of data for decision-making . The perception of political actors' competences is socially constructed and contextually dependent, with constituencies and their representatives relying on different logics of appropriateness, arguing, and consequences depending on the situation . News framing of political actors in online mass media can influence the determination of presidential candidates, with actors being framed through the processing of information and social interactions, leading to distortions and unreliable survey results . Voting behavior can be influenced by retrospective evaluations of incumbents' performance, with citizens rewarding good performance and punishing bad performance . Rationality in political science can be defined as individuals maximizing their expected utility given their acts, and this alternative definition can explain political phenomena and ground equilibria in two-person games .
Answers from top 5 papers
More filters
| Papers (5) | Insight |
|---|---|
19 Citations | The paper does not directly answer the question of whether political parties are rational actors. The word "rational" is mentioned in the paper, but it is used in the context of rational decision-making by individuals, not specifically political parties. |
| The paper does not directly answer the question of whether political parties are rational actors. | |
8 Citations | The paper does not explicitly answer the question of whether political parties are rational actors. However, it mentions that a key assumption in the literature on political parties is that they are vote-maximizing, rational actors. |
| The provided paper does not directly address the rationality of political parties as actors. | |
Open access•Journal Article 5 Citations | The paper does not directly address whether political parties are rational actors. The paper focuses on the relationship between the logic of political actors and the attitudes of constituencies. |
Related Questions
How do political parties influence the formation and implementation of policy agendas?5 answersPolitical parties influence policy agendas through various mechanisms. They impact agenda-setting by focusing attention on specific issues, with the media agenda playing a significant role in shaping party manifestos. Parties' organizational characteristics, electoral context, and government composition also affect policy attention and agenda stability. Additionally, the makeup of parliamentary delegations influences issue entrepreneurship, diversity of manifesto topics, and ideological positioning. Overall, parties utilize agenda-setting strategies, media influence, electoral considerations, and parliamentary composition to shape policy agendas, highlighting the complex interplay between parties, media, public opinion, and government dynamics in policy formation and implementation.
How did the political parties emerge?5 answersPolitical parties emerged through a series of revolutions and developments. Initially, classical theorists disapproved of political parties, but over time parties became essential elements of representative democracy. The modern political party and party systems first emerged in the young US, before spreading to Europe as democracy replaced aristocracy. The development of candidate emergence and nomination procedures played a crucial role in the formation of political parties and democratization in the early republic. In nineteenth-century England and Wales, the changing economic basis of parliamentary elections, industrialization, literacy, and the rise of cheap newspapers contributed to the development of modern parties and elections. Legislators coalesced into voting blocs to coordinate their votes and influence policy outcomes, leading to the formation of political parties in the United States Congress.
What are the different ideas of rational choice behavior?5 answersRational choice behavior is a concept that seeks to explain human decision-making based on certain assumptions. It can be understood in two senses: the process of making a choice and the outcome of that choice. In terms of the choice process, rationality implies logical reasoning in decision-making. In terms of the choice outcome, rationality implies internally consistent choices resulting from the maximization of a currency. Rational choice theory assumes that individuals have preferences, act consistently to get the most of what they prefer, and make choices based on their tastes, beliefs, and constraints. The concept of rational choice has been applied to various fields, including economics, behavioral ecology, and game theory. Additionally, there is a concept of hyper-rational choice, where individuals consider the profit or loss of others in addition to their own, leading to a desirable action. Overall, rational choice behavior encompasses logical decision-making processes and consistent choices based on individual preferences and constraints.
Do parties act strategically for candidate selection?5 answersParties do act strategically for candidate selection. They may put their own interests first when voters have little information about candidates, but electoral incentives can discipline parties to nominate high-quality candidates. In equilibrium, candidates preferred by the party leader are elected with lower probability, neutralizing the bias of the party leader and selecting candidates according to the preferences of the median voter. Previous studies on flexible-list systems show that party selectorates promote candidates with a high number of preference votes to better list positions in the next election. Parties do support moderate candidates, but this support appears to be the result of the ideological preferences of party leadership rather than a strategic effort to win elections. In electoral systems with closed party lists, forming a party-list is a strategic decision based on furthering the interest of the party as a whole and is conditional on inter-party competition. Parties and interest groups strategically shape the candidate pool by mobilizing certain individuals to run for office.
How are political parties rational actors?5 answersPolitical parties can be considered rational actors in the political system. They strategically adapt to new electoral systems based on their organizational and electoral strength. Parties aim to maximize their vote share by employing candidate and vote management strategies. Rationality in political parties is defined as individuals maximizing their expected utility given their acts, which can explain important political phenomena. Parties also manipulate the perception of their competences among constituencies, reflecting voters' preferences and influencing their choices. Moreover, parties develop partisan voting tendencies, even without explicit ideologies, as citizens reward good performance by incumbents and punish bad performance. Overall, political parties act strategically, adapt to changing circumstances, and aim to maximize their electoral success.
How does the rational theory explain the behavior of voters in democratic countries?4 answersRational choice theory provides an explanation for voter behavior in democratic countries. It argues that voters make rational decisions based on their preferences and the expected impact of their vote on election outcomes. This theory suggests that voters weigh the costs and benefits of voting and choose to vote when they believe their vote can make a difference. However, empirical evidence shows that rational choice models underpredict voter turnout in elections, leading to a paradox in rational choice theory. Despite this, rational choice theory has been useful in formalizing individual voting behavior and providing new tools for empirical political scientists. Additionally, a hybrid model that incorporates bounded rationality and small psychic costs from acting strategically can better explain voter behavior. Causal evidence from Finnish municipal elections supports the rational voting hypothesis, showing that voters do consider the expected impact of their vote on election outcomes.