Apuntes teóricos y metodológicos para una mejor comprensión de los modelos espaciales de voto

• Guillermo Boscán ^[1] ; Pablo Biderbost ^[2] ; Eduardo Muñoz ^[3]
  1. [1] Universidad de Salamanca

     Universidad de Salamanca

     Salamanca, España

     
  2. [2] Universidad Pontificia Comillas

     Universidad Pontificia Comillas

     Madrid, España

     
  3. [3] Escuela Diplomática del Ministerio de Asuntos Exteriores, Unión Europea y Cooperación de España

  Mostrar afiliaciones +
• Localización: Studia politicae, ISSN 1669-7405, Nº. 58, 2023, págs. 33-75
• Idioma: español
• Títulos paralelos:
  • Theoretical and methodological notes for a better understanding of spatial models of voting
• Enlaces
  • Texto completo
• Dialnet Métricas: 1 Cita
• Resumen
  • español

    El conocimiento profundo de la evolución conceptual y metodológica de los diferentes modelos espaciales del voto implica desandar con lupa los meandros de los modelos puros y mixtos basados en la proximidad y la direccionalidad. Su utilización en entornos politológicos latinoamericanos y españoles se ha visto limitada, entre otros factores, por la escasa compren-sión de sus detalles técnicos. Para paliar esta carencia, se presentan aquí sistemáticamente ambos tipos de modelos, haciendo uso tanto de recursos procedentes del lenguaje matemático como de esquemas que facilitan la visualización amigable de estas aportaciones teóricas.

  • English

    In-depth knowledge of the conceptual and methodological evolution of the different spatial models of voting implies tracing the meanderings of the pure and mixed models based on the ideas of proximity and directionality. Their use in Latin American and Spanish Political Science environments has been limited, among other factors, by the lack of understanding of their technical details. In order to alleviate this lack, both types of models are systematically presented here, making use of resources from mathematical language and diagrams that facilitate the user-friendly visualisation of these theoretical contributions.

• Referencias bibliográficas
  • Adams, J., Merill, S. y Grofman, B. (2005). A unified theory of party competition: a cross-national analysis integrating spatial and behavioral...
  • Alvarez, R. M. y Nagler, J. (1995). Economics, issues and the Perot candidacy: voter choice in the 1992 presidential election. American Journal...
  • BIDERBOST, P (2014). La integracion política del adolescente. Las competencias cívicas de los inmigrantes en la escuela secundaria española...
  • BoscAn, G. (2010). La modelización formal en la ciencia política: Usos, posibilidades y limitaciones, Política y gobierno, 17(1), 127-167.
  • BOSCAN, G. (2016). Voto y competencia electoral en América Latina [Tesis de Doctorado, Universidad de Salamanca]. Repositorio Institucional...
  • BoscAn, G. y Biderbost, P (2019). Application of the Canonical Correlation for the detec- tion of the influence of religiosity in the political...
  • Davis, O. A. y Hinich, M. (1966). A mathematical model of policy formation in a democrat- ic society. En J. L. Bernd (Ed.), Mathematical Applications...
  • Davis, O. A. y Hinich, M. J. (1967). Some results related to a mathematical model of policy formation in a democratic society. En J. L. Bernd...
  • Davis, O. A., Hinich, M. y Ordeshook, P C. (1970). An expository development of a math¬ematical model of the electoral process. American Political...
  • Downs, A. (1957). An economic theory of democracy. Harper.
  • Enelow, J. y Hinich, M. (1981). A new approach to voter uncertainty in the Downsian spatial model. American Journal of Political Science,...
  • Enelow, J. y Hinich, M. (1984). The spatial theory of voting: An introduction. Cambridge University Press.
  • Erikson, R. s. y Romero, D. W. (1990). Candidate equilibrium and the behavioral model of the vote. American Political Science Review, 84(04),...
  • Ferejohn, J. (1999). El desarrollo de la teoría espacial de las elecciones. En J. Farr, J. S. Dryzek y S. T. Leonard (Eds.), La ciencia política...
  • Fiorina, M. P y Plott, c. R. (1978). Committee decisions under majority rule: An experi¬mental study. The American Political Science Review,...
  • Grofman, B. (1985). The neglected role of the status quo in models of issue voting. The Journal of Politics, 47(1), 229-237.
  • Hinich, M. y Munger, M. (1997). Analyticalpolitics. Cambridge University Press.
  • Hinich, M. y Ordeshook, P c. (1969). Abstentions and equilibrium in the electoral process. Public Choice, 7(1), 81-106.
  • Iversen, T. (1994). Political leadership and representation in West European democracies: A test of three models of voting. American Journal...
  • King, G. (1989). Unifying political methodology: The likelihood theory of statistical infer- ence. Cambridge University Press.
  • Kramer, G. H. (1977). A dynamical model of political equilibrium. Journal of Economic Theory, 16(2), 310-334.
  • Lewis, J. B. y King, G. (1999). No evidence on directional vs. proximity voting. Political Analysis, 8(1), 21-33.
  • Macdonald, s. E., Listhaug, O. y Rabinowitz, G. (1991). Issues and party support in mul- tiparty systems. American Political Science Review,...
  • Macdonald, S. E., Rabinowitz, G. y Listhauo, O. (1998). On attempting to rehabilítate the proximity model: Sometimes the patient just can’t...
  • Macdonald, S. E., Rabinowitz, G. y Listhaug, O. (2001). Sophistry versus science: On further efforts to rehabilitate the proximity model....
  • Mcfadden, D. (1974). Conditional logit analysis of qualitative choice behavior. En P. Za- rembka (Ed.), Frontiers in Econometrics (pp. 105-142)....
  • McGuire, W. J. (1969). The nature of attitudes and attitude change. En G. Lindzey & E. Aronson (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology,...
  • Mckelvey, R. D. (1975). Policy related voting and electoral equilibrium. Econometrica: Journal of the Econometric Society, 43, 815-843.
  • Maddala, G. S. (1983). Limited-dependent and qualitative variables in econometrics. Cambridge University Press.
  • Matthews, S. A. (1979). A simple direction model of electoral competition. Public Choice, 34(2), 141-156.
  • Merrill, S. y Grofman, B. (1997). Directional and proximity models of voter utility and choice: A new synthesis and an illustrative test of...
  • Merrill, S. y Grofman, B. (1998). Conceptualizing voter choice for directional and dis- counting models of two-candidate spatial competition...
  • Merrill, S. y Grofman, B. (1999). A unified theory of voting: Directional and proximity spatial models. Cambridge University Press.
  • Milbrath, L. (1965). Political Participation. Rand McNally.
  • Milbrath, L. y Goel, M. (1977). Political Participation: How and Why Do People Get Involved in Politics?. University Press of America.
  • Miliband, R. (1969). The State in Capitalist Society. Weidenfeld and Nicolson.
  • Morton, R. B. (1999). Methods and models: A guide to the empirical analysis of formal models in political science. Cambridge University Press.
  • Pacheco, E. A., vilalta, c. J. y Yáñez, M. S. (2006). Una metodología formal para calcular el peso que los electores le dan a los elementos...
  • Page, B. I. (1977). Elections and social choice: The state of the evidence. American Journal of Political Science, 21(3), 639-668.
  • Page, B. I. y Brody, R. A. (1972). Policy Voting and the Electoral Process: The Vietnam War Issue. American Political Science Review, 3, 979-995.
  • Plott, c. R. (1967). A notion of equilibrium and its possibility under majority rule. The American Economic Review, 57(3), 787-806.
  • Rabinowitz, G. (1978). On the nature of political issues: Insights from a spatial analysis. American Journal of Political Science, 22, 793-817.
  • RABINOWITZ, G., MACDONALD, S. E., Y LISTHAUG, o. (1991). New players in an old game: Party strategy in multiparty systems. Comparative Political...
  • Rabinowitz, G. y Macdonald, S. E. (1989). A directional theory of issue voting. American Political Science Review, 83, 93-121.
  • Shepsle, K. A. (1972). The strategy of ambiguity: Uncertainty and electoral competition. The American Political Science Review, 66, 555-568.
  • Stokes, D. E. (1963). Spatial models of party competition. The American Political Science Review, 57(2), 368-377.
  • Thurner, P W. (2000). The empirical application of the spatial theory of voting in multipar¬ty systems with random utility models. Electoral...
  • Torgerson, W. S. (1958). Theory and methods of scaling. Wilwy.
  • Weisberg, H. F. (1974). Dimensionland: An excursion into spaces. American Journal of Political Science, 18, 743-776.
  • Westholm, A. (1997). Distance versus direction: The illusory defeat of the proximity theory of electoral choice. American Political Science...
  • Westholm, A. (2001). On the return of epicycles: Some crossroads in spatial modeling revisited. The Journal of Politics, 63(02), 436-481.
  • Wittman, D. A. (1973). Parties as utility maximizers. American Political Science Review, 67, 490-498.
  • Wittman, D. (1977). Candidates with policy preferences: A dynamic model. Journal of Economic Theory, 14(1), 180-189.