Spatial models of electoral competition locate voters and parties at points in euclidean
space—representing issue positions—and specify utility of voters for parties as functions of …

In recent years a lively debate has emerged concerning the empirical status of the traditional
proximity spatial model versus a directional model of voter choice. The central reason for this …

Professors Merrill and Grofman develop a unified model that incorporates voter motivations
and assesses its empirical predictions--for both voter choice and candidate strategy--in the …

This paper contrasts voting behavior in multicandidate elections between the proximity and
the directional spatial models of electoral competition. Under the traditional proximity spatial …

This note evaluates relative ability of the proximity and recently proposed directional variants
of the spatial model of voter choice to account for candidate evaluations in US presidential …

The directional spatial model of electoral competition–recently introduced by Rabinowitz
and Macdonald–specifies utility as keyed to intensity of preference and communality of …

Existing applications of spatial modeling to historical elections suggest that parties rarely
maximize votes. This complicates the analyst's task because explanations of party behavior …

Competing spatial models of voter choiceare compared in the context ofparliamentary
representatives selectedthrough single-member district, pluralityelections where party …

Spatial models of voting have dominated mathematical political theory since the seminal
work of Downs. The Downsian model assumes that each elector votes on the basis of his …

Conclusion The only essential differences in the examples analyzed above are in the
assumptions that are used to derive or directly specify the choice behavior that the …