FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2567193265> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2567193265 abstract "It is well-known that a voter's retrospective economic evaluations influence vote choice. A classic debate within the literature on retrospective economic voting concerns whether voters are sociotropic or egocentric when evaluating an incumbent's economic performance. Each side assumes a voter independently considers two perceptual dimensions of economic health, the national economy and one's household financial situation. However, the extant studies overlook the fact that two economic perceptions are correlated. Consequently, our current understanding often fails to account for how sociotropic and egocentric economic evaluations interactively affect vote choice. Moreover, theoretically, voters tend to simplify decision-making when confronted with several alternatives. This notion suggests that voters jointly use sociotropic and egocentric evaluations in a scale rather than use them separately to assess incumbents. Like assuming that voters use a unidimensional scale of ideology though there are several different items that reflect an individual's or a political party's ideology, it is plausible that voters use a unidimensional scale of economic evaluation. On the basis of this notion, this dissertation proposes an improved interval measure of economic evaluation to capture a voter's economic assessment in a single dimension and to provide a comparable economic voting measurement across elections. To construct the new unidimensional measure, this dissertation proposes a lexicographic or priority ordering of economic evaluations on the basis of priority heuristic theory, which provides a convincing prediction of how voters jointly use two different criteria of economic evaluation. PH theory argues that decision makers place alternatives along a single dimension by primarily using the first-priority criterion and then using the next priority to supplement the first. In the case of retrospective economic voting, voters may judge the incumbent mainly according to the economic evaluation they value more and use the other to supplement the decision. According to this theoretical expectation, this dissertation proposes a new unidimensional scale of a voter's economic evaluation. By treating this ordinal variable as nominal in a logistic regression model to predict the probability of an incumbent vote, this dissertation tests its theoretical expectation that voters use the two economic evaluations in a combined way on the basis of priority heuristics. This theoretical expectation is tested with survey data from the elections of five countries (the United States, Britain, Canada, South Korea, and Taiwan). The empirical findings of this research show that voters order economic perceptions and prioritize in sequence, thus merging sociotropic and egocentric retrospective evaluations. A logistic regression model demonstrates that the order of probabilities in voting for the incumbent corresponds with the ordinal measure. Throughout recent elections in five countries, voters used sociotropic and egocentric economic assessments jointly for making vote decisions. Voters depend primarily on sociotropic evaluations as a component of vote choice. However, they incorporate an egocentric perspective as a complementary criterion. This is a universal voting behavior of economic voters examined in this dissertation. This confirms the theoretical expectation on the basis of priority heuristics. This dissertation proposes an economic voting heuristic, an innovative unidimensional measurement combining sociotropic and egocentric assessments that is theoretically stronger than, and empirically as strong as, traditional retrospective voting models." @default.
• W2567193265 created "2017-01-06" @default.
• W2567193265 creator A5012039044 @default.
• W2567193265 date "2021-04-14" @default.
• W2567193265 modified "2023-09-25" @default.
• W2567193265 title "A new measure of economic voting : priority heuristic theory and combining sociotropic and egocentric evaluations" @default.
• W2567193265 cites W1484321158 @default.
• W2567193265 cites W1539209131 @default.
• W2567193265 cites W1543446303 @default.
• W2567193265 cites W1565589301 @default.
• W2567193265 cites W1595743797 @default.
• W2567193265 cites W1598587965 @default.
• W2567193265 cites W1638179976 @default.
• W2567193265 cites W1974749322 @default.
• W2567193265 cites W1977825494 @default.
• W2567193265 cites W1981993278 @default.
• W2567193265 cites W1993325457 @default.
• W2567193265 cites W2001898713 @default.
• W2567193265 cites W2005295938 @default.
• W2567193265 cites W2019107276 @default.
• W2567193265 cites W2020694618 @default.
• W2567193265 cites W2027286688 @default.
• W2567193265 cites W2030398623 @default.
• W2567193265 cites W2034572400 @default.
• W2567193265 cites W2041434958 @default.
• W2567193265 cites W2041946752 @default.
• W2567193265 cites W2043815344 @default.
• W2567193265 cites W2049101595 @default.
• W2567193265 cites W2054432526 @default.
• W2567193265 cites W2056418346 @default.
• W2567193265 cites W2070166665 @default.
• W2567193265 cites W2072359891 @default.
• W2567193265 cites W2072395157 @default.
• W2567193265 cites W2093981851 @default.
• W2567193265 cites W2094181743 @default.
• W2567193265 cites W2099518244 @default.
• W2567193265 cites W2108286413 @default.
• W2567193265 cites W2115074743 @default.
• W2567193265 cites W2133469585 @default.
• W2567193265 cites W2144846366 @default.
• W2567193265 cites W2145586949 @default.
• W2567193265 cites W2147973579 @default.
• W2567193265 cites W2149791711 @default.
• W2567193265 cites W2151353691 @default.
• W2567193265 cites W2159071801 @default.
• W2567193265 cites W2165650283 @default.
• W2567193265 cites W2168378782 @default.
• W2567193265 cites W2168936936 @default.
• W2567193265 cites W2171567417 @default.
• W2567193265 cites W2183205037 @default.
• W2567193265 cites W2321659091 @default.
• W2567193265 cites W2328499630 @default.
• W2567193265 cites W2329103711 @default.
• W2567193265 cites W2605334310 @default.
• W2567193265 cites W3138417305 @default.
• W2567193265 cites W3213155382 @default.
• W2567193265 cites W563304476 @default.
• W2567193265 cites W603131179 @default.
• W2567193265 cites W2132659785 @default.
• W2567193265 doi "https://doi.org/10.32469/10355/48706" @default.
• W2567193265 hasPublicationYear "2021" @default.
• W2567193265 type Work @default.
• W2567193265 sameAs 2567193265 @default.
• W2567193265 citedByCount "0" @default.
• W2567193265 crossrefType "dissertation" @default.
• W2567193265 hasAuthorship W2567193265A5012039044 @default.
• W2567193265 hasBestOaLocation W25671932652 @default.
• W2567193265 hasConcept C100001284 @default.
• W2567193265 hasConcept C118084267 @default.
• W2567193265 hasConcept C121332964 @default.
• W2567193265 hasConcept C158071213 @default.
• W2567193265 hasConcept C162324750 @default.
• W2567193265 hasConcept C175444787 @default.
• W2567193265 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W2567193265 hasConcept C199360897 @default.
• W2567193265 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W2567193265 hasConcept C202444582 @default.
• W2567193265 hasConcept C2778755073 @default.
• W2567193265 hasConcept C2780801425 @default.
• W2567193265 hasConcept C33676613 @default.
• W2567193265 hasConcept C33923547 @default.
• W2567193265 hasConcept C41008148 @default.
• W2567193265 hasConcept C520049643 @default.
• W2567193265 hasConcept C62520636 @default.
• W2567193265 hasConcept C94625758 @default.
• W2567193265 hasConceptScore W2567193265C100001284 @default.
• W2567193265 hasConceptScore W2567193265C118084267 @default.
• W2567193265 hasConceptScore W2567193265C121332964 @default.
• W2567193265 hasConceptScore W2567193265C158071213 @default.
• W2567193265 hasConceptScore W2567193265C162324750 @default.
• W2567193265 hasConceptScore W2567193265C175444787 @default.
• W2567193265 hasConceptScore W2567193265C17744445 @default.
• W2567193265 hasConceptScore W2567193265C199360897 @default.
• W2567193265 hasConceptScore W2567193265C199539241 @default.
• W2567193265 hasConceptScore W2567193265C202444582 @default.
• W2567193265 hasConceptScore W2567193265C2778755073 @default.
• W2567193265 hasConceptScore W2567193265C2780801425 @default.
• W2567193265 hasConceptScore W2567193265C33676613 @default.
• W2567193265 hasConceptScore W2567193265C33923547 @default.
• W2567193265 hasConceptScore W2567193265C41008148 @default.

• next