/
Choosing in Groups Choosing in Groups

Choosing in Groups - PowerPoint Presentation

calandra-battersby
calandra-battersby . @calandra-battersby
Follow
370 views
Uploaded On 2015-10-13

Choosing in Groups - PPT Presentation

Munger and Munger Slides for Chapter 9 Voting as a Collective Action Problem Outline of Chapter 9 Reasons for abstention Voting and collective action The classical model Turnout and strategic uncertainty ID: 159160

voting vote jeremy slides vote voting slides jeremy duke rights university produced spater reserved collective model action theory cost voters benefit votes

Share:

Link:

Embed:

Download Presentation from below link

Download Presentation The PPT/PDF document "Choosing in Groups" is the property of its rightful owner. Permission is granted to download and print the materials on this web site for personal, non-commercial use only, and to display it on your personal computer provided you do not modify the materials and that you retain all copyright notices contained in the materials. By downloading content from our website, you accept the terms of this agreement.


Presentation Transcript

Slide1

Choosing in GroupsMunger and Munger

Slides for Chapter 9Voting as a Collective Action ProblemSlide2

Outline of Chapter 9 Reasons for abstention

Voting and collective actionThe classical modelTurnout and strategic uncertaintyCollective actionDuty and expressive voting

Self-interest and probability

The paradox of not voting

Conclusion

Slides Produced by Jeremy

Spater, Duke University. All rights reserved.

2Slide3

Reasons for abstentionApathy

Little perceived difference between candidatesBelief that one’s vote is unlikely to influence outcomeBigger pictureParticular election is unimportant in the greater scheme of things

WeatherBad weather raises cost of voting

Lack of trust

Politicians will not improve the situation regardless of vote

3

Slides Produced by Jeremy

Spater

, Duke University. All rights reserved.Slide4

Voting and collective actionParticipation rate is product of four ratios:

Each step is a potential barrier to participation

Slides Produced by Jeremy Spater, Duke University. All rights reserved.

4Slide5

The classical modelThree circumstances in which eligible voter might not vote:

Indifference: No important differences between optionsAlienation: All options are too far from voter’s positionExpected net benefit: Cost of voting is high enough to deter the voter

Classical model does not include voter’s consideration of what others will do

Slides Produced by Jeremy Spater, Duke University. All rights reserved.

5Slide6
Slide7

Turnout and strategic uncertaintyVoting is costly in terms of time and inconvenience

If voters believe their candidate is far ahead/behind, one vote won’t affect outcomeVoters more likely to vote if they believe race is closeVoting is a collective action problem

If no one else votes, one person can show up to the polls and become dictator

Slides Produced by Jeremy Spater, Duke University. All rights reserved.

7Slide8

Collective actionFree riding is a problem in elections

I assume that others will vote, so I don’t need toI can get the benefits of voting for free, without votingDownsian modelIncorporates sense of civic duty

I vote if:

where:

P is prob. of my vote swinging election

NCD is net benefit from my candidate winning

D is benefit I receive from voting (civic duty)C is cost of voting

Slides Produced by Jeremy Spater, Duke University. All rights reserved.

8Slide9

Duty and expressive votingIf D > C, I always vote, regardless of probabilities

Voting is a consumption activity, rather than a rational investmentIn this case, rational choice theory is not particularly enlighteningVoting as fashion: might do it just to be seen

Slides Produced by Jeremy Spater, Duke University. All rights reserved.

9Slide10

Self-interest and probabilityIf the electorate size is 2N+1, my vote is decisive if others split votes evenly

The probability of this is given byFor electorate of 1 million, prob. is 8/100,000

Non-trivial

Slides Produced by Jeremy Spater, Duke University. All rights reserved.

10Slide11

The paradox of not votingIn Downs’ model, if p = 0, no one will vote

If no one votes, then p = 1.Game theory provides means of resolving paradoxMixed strategy equilibriumData vs. theory: more people vote than theory predicts

Models of “voter taste” address this gap

Altruism

Stigma of not voting

Slides Produced by Jeremy Spater, Duke University. All rights reserved.

11Slide12

Conclusion“Investment” model of voting under-predicts turnout

“Consumption” model provides account of determinants of votingHowever, voting involves choice, not just consumptionProblematically, voters fail to update beliefs in light of information

Is there an obligation to vote?Democracy requires participation

However, ignorant voters will often choose incorrectly

Takeaway:

Healthy skepticism, while maintaining core optimism

Slides Produced by Jeremy Spater, Duke University. All rights reserved.

12