Welcome to the new version of CaltechAUTHORS. Login is currently restricted to library staff. If you notice any issues, please email coda@library.caltech.edu
Published August 28, 2017 | Submitted
Report Open

Policy Moderation Qr Conflicting Expectations? Testing The Intentional Models of Split-Ticket Voting


In this paper we examine two models of the electoral origins of divided government. One model is the policy-moderation model, advocated originally by Fiorina (1988, 1992). The other model focuses on the different expectations held by the electorate of the branches of government, as well as the different electoral contexts (congressional and presidential) in which voter decision making occurs (Jacobson 1990A, 1990B). Utilizing individual-level survey data, we test various hypotheses derived from each model. Our empirical results give little support to the policy-moderation model. However, the second model has strong empirical support. We conclude with a discussion of our results for empirical and normative studies of divided control of government.

Additional Information

An earlier version of this paper was presented at the 1991 Midwest Political Science Association Annual Meeting, April 18-20, Chicago, Illinois. We thank John Aldrich, G. R. Boynton, David Canon, Morris Fiorina, Michael Krassa, Dean Lacy, Peter Lange, Brian Loynd, Philip Paolino, Patrick Sellers and Rick Wilson for their helpful discussions and comments. Published as Alavarez, R. Michael, and Matthew M. Schousen. "Policy Moderation or Conflicting Expectations? Testing the Intentional Models of Split-Ticket Voting." American Politics Quarterly 21, no. 4 (1993): 410-438.

Attached Files

Submitted - sswp845.pdf


Files (490.1 kB)
Name Size Download all
490.1 kB Preview Download

Additional details

August 20, 2023
January 14, 2024