Premium
Identification, Agreement and Government Performance: The Relative Impact on Voting *
Author(s) -
Pettersen Per Arnt
Publication year - 1981
Publication title -
scandinavian political studies
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.65
H-Index - 41
eISSN - 1467-9477
pISSN - 0080-6757
DOI - 10.1111/j.1467-9477.1981.tb00424.x
Subject(s) - identification (biology) , voting , loyalty , ideology , salient , politics , political science , positive economics , investment (military) , government (linguistics) , yardstick , economics , public economics , law , linguistics , philosophy , botany , geometry , mathematics , biology
Debating explanations of electoral behavior, American scholars have focused on three main theories: The identification model relying on underlying loyalty of voters towards specific parties; the political agreement or proximity model assuming a rational calculation of parties' ideological positions or stand on salient political issues as the yardstick for choice of party; and the investment model relying on voters' ability to calculate which government alternative will bring most utility for the individual voter. Examining these theories with the use of Norwegian data from the elections of 1965, 1969 and 1977, we find that the identification model is far the most powerful in predicting individual voting behavior. This model also has an edge in explaining support for the individual parties and the total distribution of voters. However, at the major postwar government election in 1965, the investment model certainly is of importance, and at the election in 1977 the significance of the proximity model has increased.