Aardal, B. (1990). The Norwegian parliamentary election of 1989, Electoral Studies 9: 151–158.
Alvarez, M. (1997). Information and elections. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
Budge, I. (1994). A new theory of party competition: Uncertainty, ideology, and policy equilibria viewed comparatively and temporally, British Journal of Political Science 24: 443–467.
Campbell, A., Converse, P., Miller, W. & Stokes, D. (1960). The American voter. New York: Wiley.
Conover, P.& Feldman, S. (1986). The role of inference in the perception of political candidates, in R. Lau & D. Sears (eds.), Political cognition. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Downs, A. (1957). An economic theory of democracy. New York: Harper&Row.
Fiorina, M. (1981). Retrospective voting in American national elections. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Gerber, A.& Green, D. (1999). Misperceptions about perceptual bias, Annual Review of Political Science 2: 189–210.
Granberg, D. (1983). Preference, expectations, and placement judgments: Some evidence from Sweden, Social Psychology Quarterly 46: 363–368.
Granberg, D. (1987). A contextual effect in political perception and self-placement on an ideology scale: Comparative analyses of Sweden and the USA, Scandinavian Political Studies 10: 39–60.
Granberg, D.& Brent, E. (1980). Perceptions and issue positions of presidential candidates, American Scientist68: 617–685.
Granberg, D.& Brown, T. (1992). The perception of ideological distance, Western Political Quarterly 45: 727–750.
Granberg, D., Harris, W. & King, M. (1981). Assimilation but little contrast in the 1976 US presidential election, The Journal of Psychology 108: 241–247.
Granberg, D.& Holmberg, S. (1988). The political system matters: Social psychology and voting behavior in Sweden and the United States. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Granberg, D.& Jenks, R. (1977). Assimilation and contrast effects in the 1972 election, Human Relations30: 623–640.
Grofman, B. (1985). The neglected role of the status quo in models of issue voting, Journal of Politics 47: 231–237.
Grofman, B. (1987). Models of voting, in S. Long (ed.), Micropolitics Annual (pp. 37–61), Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
Hamill, R., Lodge, M.& Blake, F. (1985). The breadth, depth and utility of class, partisan and ideological schemata, American Journal of Political Science 2: 850–870.
Hoch, S. (1987). Perceived consensus and predictive accuracy: The pros and cons of projection, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 53: 221–234.
Husted, T., Kenny, L.& Morton, R. (1995). Constituent errors in assessing their senators, Public Choice83: 251–271.
Iversen, T. (1994a). Political leadership and representation in West European democracies: A test of three models of voting, American Journal of Political Science 38: 45–74.
Iversen, T. (1994b). The logics of electoral politics: Spatial, directional, and mobilizational effects, Comparative Political Studies 27: 155–189.
Lacy, D.& Paolino. P. (1998). Downsian voting and the separation of powers, American Journal of Political Science 42: 1180–1199.
Lazarsfeld, P., Berelson, B.& Gaudet, H. (1948). The people's choice: How the voter makes up his mind in a presidential campaign, 2nd edn. New York: Columbia University Press.
Listhaug, O., Macdonald, S.& Rabinowitz, G. (1994a). Ideology and party support in comparative perspective, European Journal of Political Research 25: 111–149.
Listhaug, O., Macdonald, S.& Rabinowitz, G. (1994b). Issue perceptions of parties and candidates - A comparison of Norway and the United States, Scandinavian Political Studies 17: 273–287.
Macdonald, S.& Rabinowitz, G. (1998). Solving the paradox of nonconvergence: Valence, position, and direction in democratic politics, Electoral Studies 17: 281–300.
Macdonald, S., Rabinowitz, G.& Listhaug, O. (2000). Owning up to history. Paper presented at the 2000 annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Washington, DC.
Markus, G.& Converse, P. (1979). A dynamic simultaneous equation model of electoral choice, American Political Science Review 73: 1055–1070.
Merrill, S.& Grofman, B. (1997a). Directional and proximity models of voter utility and choice: A new synthesis and an illustrative test of competing models, Journal of Theoretical Politics 9: 25–48.
Merrill, S.& Grofman, B. (1997b). Response to Macdonald and Rabinowitz, Journal of Theoretical Politics 9:57–60.
Merrill, S.& Grofman, B. (1999). A unified theory of voting: Directional and proximity spatial models. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Page, B. (1976). The theory of political ambiguity, American Political Science Review 70: 742–752.
Page, B.& Jones, C. (1979). Reciprocal effects of policy preference, party loyalties, and the vote, American Political Science Review 73: 1071–1089.
Parducci, A.& Marshall, L. (1962). Assimilation v. contrast in the anchoring of perceptual judgments of weight, Journal of Experimental Psychology 63: 426–437.
Rabinowitz, G.& Macdonald, S. (1989). A directional theory of issue voting, American Political Science Review 83: 93–121.
Sartori, G. (1966). European parties: The case of polarized pluralism. In LaPolambara and Neiner (eds.), Political parties and political development (pp. 137–176). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Shepsle, K. (1972). The strategy of ambiguity, American Political Science Review 66: 1039–1058.
Sherif, M.& Hovland, C. (1961). Social judgment: Assimilation and contrast effects in communication and attitude change. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Strø m, K. (1985). Party goals and government performance in parliamentary democracies, American Political Science Review79: 738–754.
Urwin, D. (1997). The Norwegian party system from the 1880s to the 1990s, in K. Strøm & L. Svåsand (eds.), Challenges to Political Parties: The Case of Norway (pp. 33–60). Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press.
van der Eijk, C.& Niemöller, B. (1983). Electoral change in the Netherlands. Amsterdam: CT Press.