Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Thus, the information voters seek about candidates is gendered in a way that indirectly impacts voting behavior. [49] There is an overall bias that suggests that voters are using the candidates gender to make assumptions about political factors that are relatively closer to their own.
In political science and social choice theory, the spatial (sometimes ideological or ideal-point) model of voting, also known as the Hotelling–Downs model, is a mathematical model of voting behavior. It describes voters and candidates as varying along one or more axes (or dimensions), where each axis represents an attribute of the candidate ...
So, a voter might vote for Alice, Bob, and Charlie, rejecting Daniel and Emily. Approval voting uses such multiple votes. In a voting system that uses a ranked vote, the voter ranks the candidates in order of preference. For example, they might mark a preference for Bob in the first place, then Emily, then Alice, then Daniel, and finally Charlie.
Social utility efficiency is defined as the ratio between the social utility of the candidate who is actually elected by a given voting method and that of the candidate who would maximize social utility, where [] is the expected value over many iterations of the sum of all voter utilities for a given candidate: [6]
For premium support please call: 800-290-4726 more ways to reach us
The State Child Health Insurance Program (SCHIP), for example, is the largest public investment in child health care aiding over 12 million uninsured children in the United States. "This statewide health insurance program for low-income children was associated with improved access, utilization, and quality of care, suggesting that SCHIP has the ...
As for critiques concerning voter behavior, it is argued that public choice cannot explain why people vote due to limitations in rational choice theory. [38] For example, from the viewpoint of rational choice theory , the expected gains of voting depend on (1) the benefit to the voter if their candidate wins and (2) the probability that one's ...
A voter gives a high rank to a weak (i.e. pushover) candidate, but not with the intent of getting them elected. Instead, the voter intends for the weak candidate to eliminate a strong alternative, who would otherwise keep the voter's preferred candidate from winning. [8] Party raiding is a well-known example of such a strategy. [9] [10]