Advertisement

Quality & Quantity

, Volume 48, Issue 3, pp 1667–1683 | Cite as

Estimating floating voters: a comparison between the ecological inference and the survey methods

  • Luana Russo
Article

Abstract

There are two main approaches to estimating the proportion of the electorate who are floating voters: the survey method and the ecological estimate method. Both the methods have their advantages and their problems. The main difficulties with the survey method are the coverage of the sample and the problems introduced by reliance on the quality of memory of the subjects. Ecological estimates have different problems, the principal of which is known as the ecological fallacy. The aim of this paper is to assess whether the survey and ecological estimates of voter swing between two elections are significantly different. For this purpose I will consider the 2006 and 2008 Italian Parliamentary elections. Given the short temporal gap between these two elections, both the methods should give reliable estimates, as the shorter the time between the two elections, the fewer the problems which will be encountered by subjects recalling the party they voted for in the previous one, and the fewer the changes which will have taken place in the composition of the population between the two elections. The ecological data I will employ comprise all the votes cast in both of the elections under consideration (2006 and 2008), at the polling station level. In Italy there are about 60,000 polling stations, and I will analyse the data from these using the Goodman Model. The survey data has been provided by Italian National Election Studies (ITANES), and consists of a large representative sample, obtained by interviews conducted by CATI.

Keywords

Floating voters Flows-of-vote Ecological inference Goodman model Italy 

References

  1. Agnew, J.: Mapping politics: how context counts in electoral geography. Polit. Geogr. 15, 129–146 (1996)Google Scholar
  2. Bartolini, S., Mair, P.: Identity, Competition and Electoral Availability: The Stabilisation of European Electorates. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1990)Google Scholar
  3. Benewick, R.J., Birch, A.H., Blumler, J.G., Ewbank, A.: The floating voter and the liberal view of representation. Polit. Stud 17, 177–195 (1969)Google Scholar
  4. Benney, M., Gray, A.P., Pear, R.H.: How People Vote: A Study of Electoral Behavior in Greenwich. Routledge & Kegan Paul, London (1956)Google Scholar
  5. Bethlehem, J.: Applied Survey Methods. Wiley, New Jersey (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Biorcio, R., Natale, P.: Mobilità e fedeltà elettorale negli anni ottanta. Un’analisi comparata sui dati aggregati e di survey. Quaderni dell’Osservatorio Elettorale 18, 41–88 (1987)Google Scholar
  7. Brown, P.J., Payne, C.D.: Aggregate data, ecological regression and voting transition. J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 81, 452–460 (1986)Google Scholar
  8. Butler, D., Stokes, D.: Political Change in Britain: The Evolution of Electoral Choice. Macmillan, London (1974)Google Scholar
  9. Campbell, A., Converse, P.E., Miller, W.E., Stokes, D.E.: The American Voter: An Abridgment. Wiley, New York (1964)Google Scholar
  10. Clinton, J.D.: Panel bias from attrition and conditioning: a case study of the knowledge networks panel. In: Paper presented at the 2001 AAPOR Conference in Montreal, Canada (2001)Google Scholar
  11. D’Alimonte, R., De Sio, L.: Il voto: perché ha rivinto il centrodestra. In: D’Alimonte, R., Chiaramonte, A. (eds.) Proporzionale se vi pare: le elezioni politiche del 2008, Il Mulino, 75–105 (2010)Google Scholar
  12. Dalton, R.J., McAllister, I., Wattenberg, M.P.: Parties Without Partisans: Political Change in Advanced Industrial Democracies. Oxford University Press, New York (2000)Google Scholar
  13. De Sio, L.: Oltre il modello di Goodman: l‘analisi dei flussi elettorali in base ai dati aggregati. Edizioni Polistampa, Firenze (2008)Google Scholar
  14. Drummond, A.J.: Electoral volatility and party decline in western democracies: 1970–1995. Polit. Stud. 54, 628–647 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Duncan, D., Davis, B.: An alternative to ecological correlation. Am. Sociol. Rev. 18, 665–666 (1953)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Fiorina, M.P.: Retrospective Voting in American National Elections. Yale University Press, New Haven (1981)Google Scholar
  17. Franklin, M.: Voter Turnout and the Dynamics of Electoral Competition in Established Democracies Since 1945. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Freedman, D.A.: International encyclopedia of the social and behavioral sciences. In: Smelser, N.J., Wright, James (eds.) Ecological Inference and the Ecological Fallacy. Elsevier, Amsterdam (2001)Google Scholar
  19. Gallagher, M., Laver, M., Mair, P.: Representative Govrnment in Modern Europe. McGraw-hill, New York (2011)Google Scholar
  20. Gomez, R.: All the you can (not) leave behing: Habituation an vote loyalty in the Netherlands. J. Elections Public Opin. Parties 23(2), 134–153 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Goodman, L.A.: Ecological regression and behavior of individuals. Am. Sociol. Rev. 3, 663–664 (1953)Google Scholar
  22. Grofman, B., Migalski, M.: Estimating the extent of racially polarized voting in multicandidate contests. Sociol. Methods Res. 16(4), 427–454 (1988)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Grofman, B., Barreto, M.A.: A Reply to Zax’s (2002) Critique of Grofman and Migalski (1988). Double-equation approaches to ecological inference when the independent variable is misspecified. Sociol. Methods Res. 37(4), 599–617 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Heath, O.: Party systems, political cleavages, and electoral volatility in India: a state-wise analysis, 1998–1999. Elect. Stud. 24, 177–199 (2005)Google Scholar
  25. Herron, M.C., Kenneth, W.S.: Using ecological inference point estimates as dependent variables in second-stage linear regressions. Polit. Anal. 11, 44–64 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Himmelweit, H.T., Biberian, M.J., Stockdale, J.: Memory for past vote: implications of a study of bias in recall. British J. Polit. Sci. 8(3), 365–375 (1978)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. King, G.: A Solution to the Ecological Inference Problem: Reconstructing Individual Behavior from Aggregate Data. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ (1997)Google Scholar
  28. Kroh, M., van der Brug, W., van der Eijk, C.: European elections and domestic politics: lessons from the past and scenarios for the future. In: van der Brug, Wouter, van der Eijk, Cees (eds.) Prospects for Electoral Change, pp. 209–225. University of Notre Dame Press, Notre Dame (2007)Google Scholar
  29. Mainwaring, S., Zoco, E.: Political sequences and the stabilization of inter-party competition: electoral volatility in old and new democracies. Party Polit. 3, 155–178 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Pedersen, M.: Western European party systems. In: Daalder, H., Mair, Peter (eds.) Changing patterns of electoral volatility in European party systems, 1948–1977: explorations in explanation. Sage, London (1983)Google Scholar
  31. Putnam, R.D., Pharr, S.J., Dalton, R.J.: Disaffected democracies. What’s troubling the trilateral countries? In: Pharr, S.J., Putnam, R.D. (eds.) Introduction: What’s Troubling the Trilateral Democracies?. Princeton University Press, Princeton (2000)Google Scholar
  32. Ricolfi, L.: La stima dei flussi elettorali. Oltre il modello standard. Sociol. e ricerca sociale 31, 67–124 (1990)Google Scholar
  33. Robinson, W.S.: Ecological correlations and the behavior of individuals. Am. Sociol. Rev. 15, 351–357 (1950)Google Scholar
  34. Russo, L.: The nationalization of electoral change in a geographical perspective: the case of Italy (2006–2008). Geojournal (2013). doi: 10.1007/s10708-013-9480-3
  35. Schadee, H.M.A., Corbetta, P.: Metodi e modelli di analisi dei dati elettorali. il Mulino, Bologna (1984)Google Scholar
  36. Tavits, M.: The development of stable party support: electoral dynamics in post-communist Europe. Am. J. Polit. Sci. 49, 283–298 (2005)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Université de Lille 2 Lille CedexFrance

Personalised recommendations