The authors test a model of strategic vote choice in which the decision to support or not to support a candidate depends on the benefit associated with the election of a given candidate and the candidate's perceived viability. They test the model with data collected in a series of experiments in which the participants voted in eight successive elections, four in one round and four in two rounds. Results show that the same model applies to both voting systems, although the impact of perceived viability is slightly weaker in two-round elections. The authors conclude that strategic considerations are almost as important in two-round as in one-round elections.

International audienceThe chapter examines perceptions of candidate viability in a series of voting experiments conducted in Lille, Montreal, and Paris. We show that: participants in these experiments are able to distinguish viable and non-viable candidates; these perceptions become clearer over time; and they affect vote choice. Moreover, we show that voters’ behavior is unaffected by whether they are asked (or not) about their perceptions of candidates’ chances of winning. We conclude that, for studying in details the determinants of voters’ choices, there is much to be gained in measuring, in a simple and direct manner, participants’ perceptions in voting experiments