Modelos espaciales de evaluación electoral e ideológica en votantes latinoamericanos.

• Pablo Biderbost Moyano

  Universidad de Salamanca. Salamanca, España.

  https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4086-3658

• Guillermo Boscán Carrasquero

  Universidad de Salamanca. Salamanca, España.

  https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4199-2160

• Eduardo Munoz Suarez

  Universidad de Oklahoma. Norman, Estados Unidos de América.

  https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7982-9695

Partiendo de la idea de que los electorados son heterogéneos (Morris y Rabinowitz 1997; Tomz y Van Houweling, 2008; Kropko, 2012), se verifica el desempeño empírico de modelos espaciales de evaluación electoral según posición ideológica de votantes latinoamericanos. Específicamente, se evalúa mediante formulaciones mixtas la teoría clásica de proximidad (Downs, 1957; Davis, Hinich y Ordeshook, 1970) y su alternativa el paradigma de direccionalidad (Rabinowitz y Macdonald, 1989; Macdonald, Listhaug y Rabinowitz, 1991) en seis elecciones presidenciales: Brasil 2006 y 2010, México 2006, Chile 2009, Uruguay 2009 y Perú 2011. Los resultados demuestran que los votantes de derecha siguen una pauta direccional mientras que electores de izquierda se comportan según el esquema de proximidad. Los datos empleados proceden de Estudios Comparados de Sistemas Electorales (2023).

Adams, James; Merrill, Samuel y Grofman, Bernard (2005). A unified theory of party competition: a cross-national analysis integrating spatial and behavioral factors. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Boscán, Guillermo (2016). Voto y competición electoral en América Latina [Tesis Doctoral, Universidad de Salamanca]. Gredos USAL. https://gredos.usal.es/bitstream/handle/10366/128562/DDPG_Bosc%E1nG_EleccionesAm%E9ricaLatina.pdf?sequence=1

Cho, Sungdai y Endersby, James W (2003). “Issues, the spatial theory of voting, and British general elections: A comparison of proximity and directional models”. Public Choice, 114(3-4): 275-293.

CSES. 2023. Module 3 Full Release [dataset] (Publication no. 10.7804/cses.module3.2013-03-27). from The Comparative Study of Electoral Systems (www.cses.org).

Davis, Otto. A; Hinich, Melvin. J. y Ordeshook, Peter. C. (1970). “An expository development of a mathematical model of the electoral process”. The American Political Science Review, 64 (2): 426-448.

Dow, Jay. K. (1998). “Directional and proximity models of voter choice in recent US presidential elections”. Public Choice, 96(3-4): 259-270.

Iversen, Torben (1994). “Political leadership and representation in West European democracies: A test of three models of voting”. American Journal of Political Science, 38(1): 45-74.

Kropko, Jonathan (2012). Who’s a Directional Voter and Who’sa Proximity Voter? An Application of Finite Mixture Modeling to Issue Voting in the 2008. American Presidential Election. http://www.polmeth.wustl.edu/media/Paper/manuscript.pdf.

Lewis, Jeffrey B. y King, Gary (1999). “No evidence on directional vs. proximity voting”. Political analysis, 8(1): 21-33.

Macdonald, Stuart. E. y Rabinowitz, George (1998). “Solving the paradox of nonconvergence: Valence, position, and direction in democratic politics”. Electoral Studies, 17(3): 281-300.

Macdonald, Stuart. E; Rabinowitz, George y Listhaug, Ola (1995). “Political sophistication and models of issue voting”. British Journal of Political Science, 25(04): 453-483.

Macdonald, Stuart. E., Rabinowitz, G. y Listhaug, Ola (1998). “On attempting to rehabilitate the proximity model: Sometimes the patient just can't be helped” The Journal of Politics, 60(03): 653-690.

Merrill, Samuel (1995). “Discriminating between the directional and proximity spatial models of electoral competition” Electoral Studies, 14(3): 273-287.

Merrill, Samuel y Grofman, Bernard (1997). “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, Samuel y Grofman, Bernard (1999). A unified theory of voting: Directional and proximity spatial models. Cambrigde: Cambridge University Press.

Morris, Irwin L. y Rabinowitz, George (1997). “Symposium. The Directional Theory of Issue Voting: IV On the Coexistence of Directional and Proximity Voters”. Journal of Theoretical Politics, 9(1): 75-88.

Rabinowitz, George y Macdonald, Satuart E (1989). “A directional theory of issue voting”. The American Political Science Review, 83(1): 93-121.

Stokes, Donald E (1963). “Spatial models of party competition”. The American Political Science Review, 57(2): 368-377.

Tomz, Michael y Van Houweling, Robert P (2008). “Candidate positioning and voter choice”. American Political Science Review, 102(03): 303-318.

Westholm, Anders (1997). “Distance versus direction: The illusory defeat of the proximity theory of electoral choice”. American Political Science Review, 91(4): 865-883.

• PDF

Esta obra está bajo una licencia internacional Creative Commons Atribución-NoComercial-CompartirIgual 4.0.