Advertisement

Public Choice

, Volume 116, Issue 1–2, pp 147–164 | Cite as

Ballot Layout Effects in the 1995 Elections of the Brussels' Government

  • Benny Geys
  • Bruno Heyndels
Article

Abstract

Analysing data for the 1995 Regional Elections in Brussels weshow how the layout of the ballot affects voting behaviour asreflected by the candidates' preferential votes. We discusshow this special case of Ballot Position Effects can bereconciled with existing models of (expressive) voting.

Keywords

Public Finance Position Effect Vote Behaviour Preferential Vote Regional Election 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Bain, H.M. and Hecock, D.S. (1957). Ballot position and the voter's choice. Detroit: Wayne State University Press.Google Scholar
  2. Bowler, S., Donovan, T. and Happ, T. (1990). Ballot propositions and information costs: Direct democracy and the fatigued voter. Western Political Quarterly 45: 559–568.Google Scholar
  3. Brennan, G. and Hamlin, A. (2000). Democratic devices and desires. Cambridge etc.: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Byrne, G. and Pueschel, K.J. (1974). But who should I vote for coroner?. Journal of Politics 36: 778–784.Google Scholar
  5. Darcy, R. (1986). Position effects with party column ballots. Western Political Quarterly 39: 648–662.Google Scholar
  6. Darcy, R. and McAllister, I. (1990). Ballot position effects. Electoral Studies 9: 517.Google Scholar
  7. Downs, A. (1957). An economic theory of democracy. New York: Harper.Google Scholar
  8. Hamilton, J.T. and Ladd, H.F. (1996). Biased ballots? The impact of ballot structure on North Carolina elections in 1992. Public Choice 87: 259–280.Google Scholar
  9. Hung, G.K., Wilder, J., Weiss, F.L. and Curry, R.K. (1993). Random and direct path eye movements during target search. Medical Science Research 21: 389–391.Google Scholar
  10. Hermans V., Gils, M. van and Baelus, Chr. (1999). Ouderen en elektronisch stemmen.Hogeschool Antwerpen (Unpublished manuscript).Google Scholar
  11. Krosnick, J.A. and Alwin, D.F. (1987). An evaluation of a cognitive theory of response-order effects in survey measurement. Public Opinion Quarterly 51: 201–219.Google Scholar
  12. Miller, J.M. and Krosnick, J.A. (1998). The impact of candidate name order on election outcomes. Public Opinion Quarterly 62: 291–330.Google Scholar
  13. Mueller, J.E. (1970). Choosing among 133 candidates. Public Opinion Quarterly 34: 395–402.Google Scholar
  14. Neisser, U. (1964). Visual search. Scientific American 210: 94–102.Google Scholar
  15. Riker, W.H. and Ordeshook, P.C. (1968). A theory of the calculus of voting. American Political Science Review 62: 25–42.Google Scholar
  16. Robson, C. and Walsh, B. (1974). The importance of positional voting bias in the Irish general election of 1973. Political Studies 22: 191–203.Google Scholar
  17. Scott, D. (1993). Visual search in modern human-computer interfaces. Behaviour & Information Technology 12: 174–189.Google Scholar
  18. Siegel, S. and Castellan, J.N. (1988). Nonparametric statistics for the behavioral sciences. 2nd edition. New York: McGraw Hill.Google Scholar
  19. Simon, H.A. (1957). Models of man. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  20. Taebel, D.E. (1975). The effect of ballot position on electoral success. American Journal of Political Science 19: 519–526.Google Scholar
  21. Wand, J.N., Shotts, K.W., Sekhon, J.S., Mebane Jr., W.R., Herron, M.C. and Brady, H.E. (2001). The butterfly did it: The aberrant vote for Buchanan in Palm Beach County, Florida. American Political Science Review 95: 793–810.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Benny Geys
    • 1
  • Bruno Heyndels
    • 1
  1. 1.Vrije Universiteit BrusselBrusselBelgium

Personalised recommendations