Public Choice

, Volume 86, Issue 1–2, pp 137–156

Random errors, dirty information, and politics

  • Reiner Eichenberger
  • Angel Serna
Article

Abstract

Rational voters' assessments of candidates and policy proposals are unbiased, but affected by random errors. "Clean" information decreases these errors, while "dirty" information increases them. In politics, most voting procedures weigh random individual errors asymmetrically. Thus, such errors do not counterbalance one another in the aggregate. They systematically affect politics. This illuminates the roles of political propaganda and interest groups. It helps to explain various puzzles in Public Choice, e.g., the frequent use of inefficient policy instruments. Institutional conditions are identified that shape the aggregate impact of individual errors and the politicians' incentives to produce dirty information.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Abramowitz, A.I. (1980). A comparison of voting for U.S. senators and representatives in 1978. American Political Science Review 74: 633–640.Google Scholar
  2. Alesina, A. and Cukierman, A. (1990). The politics of ambiguity. Quarterly Journal of Economics 105: 829–850.Google Scholar
  3. Alvarez, M.R. and Franklin, C.H. (1993). Uncertainty and political perceptions. Social Science Working Paper 844. California Institute of Technology.Google Scholar
  4. Austen-Smith, D. (1987). Interest groups, campaign contributions, and probabilistic voting. Public Choice 54: 123–139.Google Scholar
  5. Austen-Smith, D. (1991). Rational consumers and irrational voters. Economics and Politics 3: 73–92.Google Scholar
  6. Becker, G.S. (1976). The economic approach to human behavior. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  7. Becker, G.S. (1983). A theory of competition among pressure groups for political influence. Quarterly Journal of Economics 98: 371–400.Google Scholar
  8. Bernhardt, M.D. and Ingberman, D.E. (1985). Candidate reputations and the incumbency effect. Journal of Public Economics 27: 47–67.Google Scholar
  9. Buchanan, J.M. and Wagner, R.E. (1977). Democracy in deficit. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  10. Conlisk, J. (1988). Optimization cost. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization 9: 213–228.Google Scholar
  11. Coughlin, P. (1986). Probabilistic voting models. In S. Kotz, N.L. Johnson and C.B. Read (Eds.), Encyclopedia of Statistical Sciences. Vol. 7, 204–210. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  12. Dellas, H. and Koubi, V. (1994). Smoke screen: A theoretical framework. Public Choice 78: 351–358.Google Scholar
  13. Downs, A. (1957). An economic theory of democracy. New York: Harper and Row.Google Scholar
  14. Eichenberger, R. (1992). Verhaltensanomalien und Wirtschaftswissenschaft. Herausforderungen, Reaktionen und Perspektiven. Wiesbaden: Deutscher Universitäts Verlag.Google Scholar
  15. Eichenberger, R. (1994). The benefits of federalism and the risk of overcentralization. Kyklos 47: 403–420.Google Scholar
  16. Ferejohn, J. (1977). On the decline of competition in congressional elections. American Political Science Review 71: 166–176.Google Scholar
  17. Ferejohn, J. and Calvert, R.L. (1984). Presidential coattails in historical perspective. American Journal of Political Science 28: 127–146.Google Scholar
  18. Fiorina, M.P. (1974). Representatives, roll call, and constituencies. Lexington: D.C. Health.Google Scholar
  19. Fiorina, M.P. (1977). The case of the vanishing marginals: The bureaucracy did it. American Political Science Review 71: 177–181.Google Scholar
  20. Frey, B.S. (1991). Forms of expressing economic discontent. In H. Norpoth, M.S. Lewis-Beck and J.D. Lafay (Eds.), Economics and politics. The calculus of support, 267–280. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
  21. Frey, B.S. (1992). Pricing and regulating affect environmental ethics. Environmental and Resource Economics 2: 399–412.Google Scholar
  22. Frey, B.S. and Eichenberger, R. (1994). Economic incentives transform psychological anomalies. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organizations 23: 215–234.Google Scholar
  23. Gerber, E.R. and Lupia, A. (1993). When do campaigns matter? Informed votes, the heteroscedastic logit and the responsiveness of electoral outcomes. Social Science Working Paper 814. California Institute of Technology.Google Scholar
  24. Hahn, R.W. (1989). Economic prescriptions for environmental problems: How the patients followed the doctor's orders. Journal of Economic Perspectives 3: 95–114.Google Scholar
  25. Hinich, M.J. and Munger, M.C. (1989). Political investment, voter perceptions, and candidate strategy: An equilibrium spatial analysis. In P.C. Ordeshook (Ed.), Models of strategic choice in politics, 49–67. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
  26. Hirschman, A.O. (1970). Exit, voice and loyalty. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  27. Hirshleifer, J. and Riley, J.G. (1979). The analytics of uncertainty and information — An expository survey. Journal of Economic Literature 17: 1375–1421.Google Scholar
  28. Jewell, M.E. and Breaux, D. (1989). The effect of incumbency on state legislative elections. Legislative Studies Quarterly 13: 495–514.Google Scholar
  29. Kahneman, D. and Tversky, A. (1984). Choices, values and frames. American Psychologist 39: 341–350.Google Scholar
  30. King, G. (1991). Constituency service and incumbency advantage. British Journal of Political Science 21: 119–128.Google Scholar
  31. King, G. and Gelman, A. (1991). Systematic consequences of incumbency advantage in U.S. House elections. American Journal of Political Science 35: 110–138.Google Scholar
  32. Kirchgässner, G. (1992). Towards a theory of low-cost decisions. European Journal of Political Economy 8: 230–250.Google Scholar
  33. Lafay, J.D. (1993). The silent revolution of public choice. In A. Breton, G. Galeotti, P. Salmon and R. Wintrobe. Preferences and Democracy, Villa Colombella Papers, 159–191. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  34. Magee, S., Brock, W. and Young, L. (1989). Black hole tariffs and endogenous policy theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  35. Mayhew, D.R. (1971). Congress, the electoral connection. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  36. Mayhew, D.R. (1974). Congressional elections: The case of the vanishing marginals. Polity 6: 295–317.Google Scholar
  37. McCubbins, M.D. and Sullivan, T. (1984). Constituency influences on legislative policy choice. Quality and Quantity 18: 299–319.Google Scholar
  38. Morrison, S. (1986). A survey of road pricing. Transportation Research 20A (2): 87–95.Google Scholar
  39. Mueller, D.C. (1989). Public Choice II. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  40. Nannestad, P. and Paldam, M. (1991). Economic grievances and government support in a small welfare state: Micro theory and the Danish case. Working Paper # 3 from the project: Economic foundations of mass politics. Information, expectations, and political reactions. University of Aarhus.Google Scholar
  41. Oates, W.E. (1988). On the nature and measurement of fiscal illusion: A survey. In G. Brennan et al. (Eds.), Taxation and fiscal federalism: Essays in honour of Russell Mathews, 65–82. Canberra: Australian National University Press.Google Scholar
  42. Olson, M. (1965). The logic of collective action. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  43. Pommerehne, W.W. and Schneider, F. (1978). Fiscal illusion, political institutions, and local public spending. Kyklos 31: 381–408.Google Scholar
  44. Reed, W.R. and Schansberg, D.E. (1992). The behaviour of congressional tenure over time: 1953–1991. Public Choice 73: 183–203.Google Scholar
  45. Rothschild, M. and Stiglitz, J.E. (1970). Increasing risk: I. A definition. Journal of Economic Theory 2: 225–243.Google Scholar
  46. Sappington, D.E.M. and Stiglitz, J.E. (1987). Information and regulation. In E. Bailey (Ed.), Public Regulation. New Perspectives on Institutions and Policies, 3–43. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  47. Shepsle, K.A. (1972). The strategy of ambiguity: Uncertainty and electoral competition. American Political Science Review 66: 555–568.Google Scholar
  48. Simon, H.A. (1957). Models of man. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  49. Sorensen, R. (1992). Fiscal illusions: Nothing but illusions? European Journal of Political Research 22: 279–305.Google Scholar
  50. Stigler, G.J. (1961). The economics of information. Journal of Political Economy 69: 213–225.Google Scholar
  51. Stiglitz, J.E. (1984). Information and economic analysis: A perspective. Economic Journal 95 (supplement): 21–41.Google Scholar
  52. Tullock, G. (1989). The economics of special privilege and rent seeking. Boston: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  53. Tullock, G. (1990). The costs of special privilege. In J.E. Kalt and K.A. Shepsle (Eds.), Perspectives on positive political economy, 195–244. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  54. Ursprung, H.W. (1991). Economic politics and political competition. In A.L. Hillman (Ed.), Markets and politicians. Politicized economic choice, 1–25. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  55. Ursprung, T. (1994). The use and effect of political propaganda in democracies. Public Choice 78: 269–282.Google Scholar
  56. Wärneryd, K.-E. (1986). Advertising and consumer behavior. In B. Gilad and S. Kaish (Eds.), Handbook of Behavioral Economics, Vol. A: Behavioral Microeconomics, 89–126. Greenwich, Connecticut: JAI Press.Google Scholar
  57. Wittman, D. (1983). Candidate motivation: A synthesis of alternative theories. American Political Science Review 77: 142–157.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1996

Authors and Affiliations

  • Reiner Eichenberger
    • 1
  • Angel Serna
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute for Empirical Economic ResearchUniversity of ZürichZürichSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations