1973
DOI: 10.1016/0049-089x(73)90014-8
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A demand analysis of voting costs and voting participation

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
11
0

Year Published

1979
1979
2014
2014

Publication Types

Select...
5
3

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 27 publications
(11 citation statements)
references
References 6 publications
0
11
0
Order By: Relevance
“…These results are reinforced by the findings of Ashenfelter and Kelley (1975), who estimated that in the 1972 election the probability of voting was increased by at least 0.10 for those who had been contacted by a party worker. By contrast, the earlier study by Silver (1973) suggested that this variable was insignificant [13].…”
Section: Uncertainty Of Outcome: Marginalitymentioning
confidence: 58%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…These results are reinforced by the findings of Ashenfelter and Kelley (1975), who estimated that in the 1972 election the probability of voting was increased by at least 0.10 for those who had been contacted by a party worker. By contrast, the earlier study by Silver (1973) suggested that this variable was insignificant [13].…”
Section: Uncertainty Of Outcome: Marginalitymentioning
confidence: 58%
“…This conclusion, of course, depends on the acceptability of the indicators used to measure B and P. In the studies by Barzel and Silberberg (1973), and Tollison et al (1975), for example, the use of "proportion of the population registered" as a measure of intensity of feeling about the election is open to question; it may be better to regard "willingness to register" as simply another indicator of "willingness to participate" rather than as an independent determinant of the voting decision. The "closeness" indicators can also be questioned, on the grounds that uncertainty of outcome is likely to increase the entertainment value of the election, hence to operate through D rather than P. This is, indeed, the interpretation given to the closeness indicator in Silver's (1973) study, and further support for this interpretation comes from the fact that in the three studies, where "interest in the campaign" is included as an independent variable in a regression analysis, closeness becomes insignificant (Silver, 1973;Ashenfelter and Kelley, 1975;Abramson and Aldrich, 1982) [6]. Yet it would probably be going too far to write off the "P-factor" completely, since, to the extent that B affects turn-out at all, it does so only if people believe that P, and hence BP, is significantly different from zero.…”
Section: Tests Of Expected Utility Theorymentioning
confidence: 96%
“…Riker and Ordeshook (1968) and Ashenfelter and Kelley (1975) show that turnout increases when citizens perceive greater differences between the alternatives. And Ashenfelter and Kelly (1975) and Silver (1973) show that higher costs of voting depress turnout. Despite considerable empirical support for elements and extensions of the Downsian turnout model, critics have vociferously emphasized its failure to accurately predict behavior (Ferejohn and Fiorina 1974;Mueller 2003).…”
Section: Introduction and Theorymentioning
confidence: 96%
“…3. See, e.g., Ashenfelter and Kelley 0975); Rosenstone and Wolfinger (1978);and Silver (1973 Regarding the early projections, the number of polling hours occuring after the NBC projection averaged 0.68 hours with a range from zero hours (twenty-seven states) to 4.75 hours (Alaska). 5.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The consumption approach is evident in the calculus of voting model of Riker and Ordeshook 0968), who reformulate Downs' theory by adding a direct utility of voting term D to the benefit-cost equation. See also Ashenfelter and Kelley 0975); Crain and Deaton (1977); Niemi (1976);and Silver (1973). 11.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%