Public Choice

, Volume 70, Issue 2, pp 181–213 | Cite as

Asymmetric information and the electoral momentum of public opinion polls

  • Alex Cukierman

Abstract

This paper demonstrates that the existence of public opinion polls amplifies the effects of shifts in the distribution of the public's preferences over the issue space on the election's results. Voters evaluate candidates by their positions on the issue space and by a valence or general ability dimension. Some individual's (the informed) have more precise information about the relative abilities of candidates than others (the uninformed). Since public opinion polls reflect the information of the informed, high approval for a candidate at the polls signals to the uninformed that he is more likely to be abler. However, high approval may also reflect changes in the distribution of the public on the issue space. As a result the uninformed partly confuse the two effects and public opinion polls tend to reinforce the effects of shifts in the public's ideological preferences on election results. A shift to the right that shows up as more support for the right-wing candidate at the polls is partly interpreted as a higher efficiency of this candidate. As a result he wins with a higher margin than the margin he would have won with in the absence of polls or under perfect information.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Aranson, P. (1972). A theory of the calculus of voting for alternative, three-consistent election systems. The University of Rochester, Rochester, NY.Google Scholar
  2. Bernhardt, M.D. and Ingberman, D. (1985). Candidates' reputations and the ‘incumbency effect’. Journal of Public Economics 27: 47–68.Google Scholar
  3. Brunk, H.D. (1965). An introduction to mathematical statistics. 2nd ed. Waltham: Blaisdell.Google Scholar
  4. Cukierman, A. and Meltzer, A.H. (1986). A positive theory of discretionary policy, the cost of democratic government and the benefits of a constitution. Economic Inquiry 24: 367–388.Google Scholar
  5. Enelow, J.M. and Hinich, M.J. (1984). The spatial theory of voting: An introduction. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  6. Grossman, S.J. (1981). An introduction to the theory of rational expectations under asymmetric information. The Review of Economic Studies 48: 541–559.Google Scholar
  7. Grossman, S.J. ad Stiglitz, J.E. (1980). On the impossibility of informationally efficient markets. American Economic Review 70: 393–408.Google Scholar
  8. Grunberg, E. and Modigliani, F. (1954). The predictability of social events. The Journal of Political Economy 62 (December): 465–478.Google Scholar
  9. Ingberman, D. (1985, January). Reputational dynamics in spatial competition. Manuscript GSIA, Carnegie-Mellon University.Google Scholar
  10. Ledyard, J.O. (1984). The pure theory of large two-candidate elections. Public Choice 44: 7–41.Google Scholar
  11. McKelvey, R.D. and Ordeshook, P.C. (1972). A general theory of the calculus of voting. In J.F. Herndon and J.L. Bernd (Eds.), Mathematical applications in political science, Vol. VI: 32–78. Charlottesville: University of Virginia Press.Google Scholar
  12. McKelvey, R.D. and Ordeshook, P.C. (1985). Elections with limited information: A fulfilled expectations model using contemporaneous poll and endorsement data as information sources. Journal of Economic Theory 36: 55–85.Google Scholar
  13. McKelvey, R.D. and Page, R.T. (1986). Common knowledge, consensus, and aggregate information. Econometrica 54: 109–127.Google Scholar
  14. Palfrey, T. and Rosenthal, H. (1985). Voter participation and strategic uncertainty. American Political Science Review 79: 62–78.Google Scholar
  15. Rogoff, K. and Sibert, A. (1988). Equilibrium political business cycles. The Review of Economic Studies 55: 1–16.Google Scholar
  16. Romer, T. and Rosenthal, H. (1984). Voting models and empirical evidence. American Scientist 72 (September–October): 465–473.Google Scholar
  17. Simon, H.A. (1954). Bandwagon and underdog effects of election predictions. Public Opinion Quarterly 18 (Fall). Reprinted in H.A. Simon, Models of man social and rational. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1991

Authors and Affiliations

  • Alex Cukierman
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of EconomicsPrinceton UniversityPrinceton

Personalised recommendations