Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-t5pn6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-24T10:49:44.264Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Predictably Unpredictable: The Effects of Conflict Involvement on the Error Variance of Vote Models

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 March 2013

Abstract

International conflict has profoundly influenced election outcomes in some cases, and in other cases has had a minimal impact. This article develops a theory that the increased salience of foreign policy issues following periods of international hostilities increases the variance of government parties’ vote shares. In elections following conflict, the ability to accurately predict election outcomes using traditional economic voting models is reduced. The article provides evidence from advanced democracies in the post-World War II era that being involved in international disputes increases the predictive error of vote shares. More substantively, vote choice models should model the role of exogenous shocks such as international conflict in order to avoid making misleading inferences. The study concludes by discussing the meaningful implications for various theories of voting behavior and international conflict.

Type
Articles
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2013 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

*

Department of Political Science, University of Missouri; Department of Political Science, Purdue University (emails williamslaro@missouri.edu, dbrule@purdue.edu). The authors would like to thank the four anonymous reviewers as well as Daina Chiba, Cooper Drury, Michael T. Koch, Hoon Lee, Dave Lektzian, Brandon Prins, Toby Rider and Guy D. Whitten for their valuable comments. An online appendix with supplementary materials is available at http://dx.doi.org/doi:10.1017/S000712341200083X.

References

Aldrich, John H., Sullivan, John L. Borgida, Eugene. 1989. Foreign Affairs and Issue Voting: Do Presidential Candidates ‘Waltz Before A Blind Audience’? American Political Science Review 83:123141.Google Scholar
Almond, Gabriel A. 1950. The American People and Foreign Policy. New York: Harcourt, Brace.Google Scholar
Anderson, Christopher J. 1995. The Dynamics of Public Support for Coalition Governments. Comparative Political Studies 28:350383.Google Scholar
Arena, Philip. 2008. Success Breeds Success? War Outcomes, Domestic Opposition, and Elections. Conflict Management and Peace Science 25:136151.Google Scholar
Bechtel, Michael M. 2012. Not Always Second Order: Subnational Elections, National-Level Vote Intentions, and Volatility Spillovers in a Multi-Level Electoral System. Electoral Studies 31:170183.Google Scholar
Braumoeller, Bear F. 2006. Explaining Variance: Or, Stuck in a Moment We Can't Get Out Of. Political Analysis 14:268290.Google Scholar
Bueno de Mesquita, Bruce, Smith, Alastair, Siverson, Randolph M. Morrow, James D.. 2003. The Logic of Political Survival. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Bueno de Mesquita, Bruce Lalman, David. 1990. Domestic Opposition and Foreign War. The American Political Science Review 84:747765.Google Scholar
Bueno de Mesquita, Bruce Siverson, Randolph. 1995. War and the Survival of Political Leaders: A Comparative Analysis of Regime Type and Accountability. American Political Science Review 89:841855.Google Scholar
Chiozza, Giacomo Goemans, Hein. 2004. International Conflict and the Tenure of Leaders: Is War Still Ex Post Inefficient? American Journal of Political Science 48:604619.Google Scholar
de Boef, Suzanna Keele, Luke. 2008. Taking Time Seriously: Dynamic Regression. American Journal of Political Science 52:184200.Google Scholar
DeRouen, Karl Peake, Jeffrey. 2002. The Dynamics of Diversion: The Domestic Implications of Presidential Uses of Force. International Interactions 28:191211.Google Scholar
Eichenberg, Richard C. 2005. Victory Has Many Friends: US Public Opinion and the Use of Military Force, 1981–2005. International Security 30:140177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fearon, James D. 1995. Rationalist Explanations for War. International Organization 49:379414.Google Scholar
Feaver, Peter D. Gelpi, Christopher. 2004. Choosing Your Battles: American Civil-Military Relations and the Use of Force. Washington: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Franklin, Charles H. 1991. Eschewing Obfuscation? Campaigns and the Perception of US Senate Incumbents. American Political Science Review 858:11931214.Google Scholar
Gartner, Scott Sigmund Segura, Gary M.. 1998. War, Casualties and Public Opinion. The Journal of Conflict Resolution 42:278300.Google Scholar
Gelpi, Christopher, Grieco, Joseph. 2000. Democracy, Crisis Escalation, and the Survival of Political Leaders, 1918–1992. Unpublished manuscript, Duke University, Durham, NC.Google Scholar
Gelpi, Christopher, Feaver, Peter D. Reifler, Jason. 2009. Paying the Human Costs of War: American Public Opinion and Casualties in Military Conflicts. New Haven, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Gujarati, Damodar. 2003. Basic Econometrics. New York: Mc-Graw Hill.Google Scholar
Heston, Alan, Summers, Robert, Aten, Bettina. 2006. Penn World Table Version 6.2. Center for International Comparisons of Production, Income and Prices at the University of Pennsylvania. Available from pwt.sas.upenn.edu.Google Scholar
Jentlesen, Bruce W. Britton, Rebecca L.. 1998. Still Pretty Prudent: Post-Cold War American Public Opinion on the Use of Military Force. Journal of Conflict Resolution 42:395417.Google Scholar
Jones, Daniel, Bremer, Stuart Singer, J. David. 1996. Militarized Interstate Disputes, 1816–1992: Rationale, Coding Rules, and Empirical Patterns. Conflict Management and Peace Science 15:163213.Google Scholar
Kayser, Mark Andreas. 2005. Who Surfs, Who Manipulates? The Determinants of Opportunistic Election Timing and Electorally Motivated Economic Intervention. American Political Science Review 99:111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kennedy, Peter. 2003. Gude to Econometrics. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
King, Gary, Keohane, Robert O. Verba, Sidney. 1994. Designing Social Inquiry: Scientific Inference in Qualitative Research. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Koch, Michael T. 2011. Casualties and Incumbents: Do the Casualties from Interstate Conflicts Affect Incumbent Party Vote Share? British Journal of Political Science 41:795817.Google Scholar
Larson, Eric V. 1996. Casualties and Consensus: The Historical Role of Casualties in Domestic Support for US Military Operations. Santa Monica, CA: RAND.Google Scholar
Laver, Michael Shepsle, Kenneth A.. 1998. Events, Equilibria, and Government Survival. American Journal of Political Science 42:2854.Google Scholar
Lee, Jong R. 1977. Rally Around the Flag: Foreign Policy Events and Presidential Popularity. Presidential Studies Quarterly 7:252256.Google Scholar
Lewis-Beck, Michael S. 1988. Economics and Elections: The Major Western Democracies. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
Lupia, Arthur W. Strom, Kaare. 1995. Coalition Termination and the Strategic Timing of Parliamentary Elections. American Political Science Review 89:648665.Google Scholar
MacKuen, Michael B. 1983. Political Drama, Economic Conditions, and the Dynamics of Presidential Popularity. American Journal of Political Science 27:165192.Google Scholar
Morgan, T. Clifton Bickers, Kenneth. 1992. Domestic Discontent and the External Use of Force. The Journal of Conflict Resolution 36:2552.Google Scholar
Mueller, John. 1973. War, Presidents and Public Opinion. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Norpoth, Helmut. 1987. Guns and Butter and Government Popularity in Britain. American Political Science Review 81:949959.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oneal, John R., Lian, Brad Joyner, James H.. 1996. Are the American People ‘Pretty Prudent’? Public Responses to US Uses of Force, 1950–1988. International Studies Quarterly 40:261279.Google Scholar
Ostrom, Charles Job, Brian. 1986. The President and the Political Use of Force. American Political Science Review 80:541566.Google Scholar
Paldam, Martin. 1991. How Robust is the Vote Function: A Study of Seventeen Nations over Four Decades. Vol. 999. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
Palmer, Harvey D. Whitten, Guy D.. 2000. Government Competence, Economic Performance and Endogenous Election Dates. Electoral Studies 19:413426.Google Scholar
Powell, G. Bingham Whitten, Guy D.. 1993. A Cross-National Analysis of Economic Voting: Taking Account of the Political Context. American Journal of Political Science 37:391414.Google Scholar
Reiter, Dan IIIStam, Allan C.. 1998. Democracy, War Initiation, and Victory. American Political Science Review 92:377390.Google Scholar
Richards, D., Morgan, C., Wilson, R., Schwebach, V. Young, G.. 1993. Good Times, Bad Times and the Diversionary Use of Force: A Tale of Some Not So Free Agents. The Journal of Conflict Resolution 37:504535.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schultz, Kenneth. 2001. Democracy and Coercive Diplomacy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Singer, Matthew M. 2011. Who Says ‘It's the Economy’? Cross-National and Cross-Individual Variation in the Salience of Economic Performance. Comparative Political Studies 44:284312.Google Scholar
Smith, Alastair. 1998. International Crises and Domestic Politics. American Political Science Review 92:623638.Google Scholar
Smith, Alastair. 2003. Election Timing in Majoritarian Parliaments. British Journal of Political Science 33:397418.Google Scholar
Williams, Laron K., Brule, David J. Koch, Michael T.. 2010. War Voting: Interstate Disputes, the Economy, and Electoral Outcomes. Conflict Management and Peace Science 27:442460.Google Scholar
Williams, Laron K. Whitten, Guy D.. 2012. But Wait, There's More! Maximizing Substantive Inferences from TSCS Models. The Journal of Politics 74:685693.Google Scholar
Woldendorp, Jaap, Keman, Hans Budge, Ian. 2000. Party Government in 48 Democracies (1945–1998). London: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
Supplementary material: PDF

Williams Appendix

Williams Appendix

Download Williams Appendix(PDF)
PDF 72 KB