000			01846naa a2200181uu 4500
001			9012713385510
003			OSt
005			20190211164609.0
008			090127s2009 xx ||||gr |0|| 0 eng d
100	1		_aTOMZ, Michael _936041
245	1	0	_aCandidate positioning and voter choice
260			_aNew York, NY : _bCambridge University Press, _cAugust 2008
520	3		_aThis article examines a fundamental aspect of democracy: the relationship between the policy positions of candidates and the choices of voters. Researchers have suggested three criteria—proximity, direction, and discounting—by which voters might judge candidates' policy positions. More than 50 peer-reviewed articles, employing data from more than 20 countries, have attempted to adjudicate among these theories. We explain why existing data and methods are insufficient to estimate the prevalence of these criteria in the electorate. We then formally derive an exhaustive set of critical tests: situations in which the criteria predict different vote choices. Finally, through survey experiments concerning health care policy, we administer the tests to a nationally representative sample. We find that proximity voting is about twice as common as discounting and four times as common as directional voting. Furthermore, discounting is most prevalent among ideological centrists and nonpartisans, who make sophisticated judgments that help align policy with their preferences. These findings demonstrate the promise of combining formal theory and experiments to answer previously intractable questions about democracy
700	1		_aHOUWELING, Robert P. Van _936042
773	0	8	_tAmerican political science review _g102, 3, p. 303-318 _dNew York, NY : Cambridge University Press, August 2008 _xISSN 00030554 _w
942			_cS
998			_a20090127 _b1338^b _cTiago
999			_aConvertido do Formato PHL _bPHL2MARC21 1.1 _c28069 _d28069
041			_aeng