Skip to main content
×
×
Home

Policy-Balancing and Ticket-Splitting: Problems with ‘Preference for Checks and Balances’ in Taiwanese Electoral Studies*

  • TED HSUAN YUN CHEN (a1), TZU-PING LIU (a2) and CHUNG-LI WU (a3)
Abstract

In order to better understand the individual-level motives for ticket-splitting, Taiwan's Election and Democratization Study has since 2001 included a question aimed at measuring respondents’ preferences for checks and balances. We argue that this set of questions, designed to measure a combination of Fiorina's policy-balancing hypothesis and Ladd's cognitive Madisonianism, is inconsistent with principles of survey methodology and thus produces data that are suboptimal. Following a method developed by Carsey and Layman, we propose an alternative concept, the policy-balancing index derived from the perceived ideological distance between respondent and political parties, which both avoids methodological violations and provides us with a more precise concept to work with. We test the index and find it to be a significant determinant of ticket-splitting behavior.

Copyright
Footnotes
Hide All
*

Data analyzed in this article were collected as part of the research project entitled ‘Taiwan's Election and Democratization Study, 2012: Presidential and Legislative Elections’ (TEDS2012) (NSC 100-2420-H002-030). The coordinator of the multi-year TEDS project is Chi Huang of the Department of Political Science at National Chengchi University. The principal investigator is Professor Yun-han Chu of the Institute of Political Science at Academia Sinica. More information can be found on the TEDS website (http://www.tedsnet.org). The Department of Political Science, National Taiwan University; the Department of Political Science, Soochow University; the Graduate Institute of Political Science, National Sun Yat-Sen University; the Department of Political Science and Graduate Institute of Political Economy, National Cheng Kung University; the Department of Political Science, Tunghai University; and the Election Study Center, National Chengchi University, were responsible for distributing the data. The authors appreciate the assistance of the institutes and individuals aforementioned in providing data. This research is partially supported by National Chengchi University's Top University Project. The views expressed in this paper are those of the authors alone.

Footnotes
References
Hide All
Alberto, Alesina and Rosenthal, Howard (1995), Partisan Politics, Divided Government and the Economy, New York: Cambridge University Press.
Alvarez, Alberto and Schousen, Matthew M. (1993), ‘Policy Moderation or Conflicting Expectation? Testing the Intentional Models of Split-Ticket Voting’, American Politics Quarterly, 21 (4): 410–38.
Bakken, David G. (2008), ‘The Weakest link: A Cognitive Approach to Improving Survey Data Quality’, in Orme, Bryan K. (ed.) Proceedings of the Sawtooth Software Conference October 2007, Sequim, WA: Sawtooth Software, pp. 1122.
Bassili, John N. and Scott, B. Stacey (1996), ‘Response Latency as a Signal to Question Problems in Survey Research’, Public Opinion Quarterly, 60 (3): 390–9.
Beck, Paul Allen, Baum, Lawrence, Clausen, Aage R., and Smith, Charles E. Jr. (1992), ‘Patterns and Sources of Ticket Splitting in Subpresidential Voting’, American Political Science Review, 86 (4): 916–28.
Born, Richard (1994), ‘Split-Ticket Voters, Divided Government, and Fiorina's Policy-Balancing Model’, Legislative Studies Quarterly, 19 (1): 95115.
Burden, Barry C. and Kimball, David C. (1998), ‘A New Approach to the Study of Ticket Splitting’, American Political Science Review, 92 (3): 533–44.
Carsey, Thomas M. and Layman, Geoffrey C. (2004), ‘Policy Balancing and Preferences for Party Control of Government’, Political Research Quarterly, 57 (4): 541–50.
Chen, Lu-huei and Yu, Ching-hsin (2001), ‘The People's View on Divided Government: Interaction among Parties and Governmental Approval Rates’, Theory and Policy, 15 (3): 6178 (in Chinese).
Cox, Gary W. and Kernell, Samuel (1991), ‘Introduction: Governing a Divided Era’, in Cox, Gary W. and Kernell, Samuel (eds.), The Politics of Divided Government, Boulder, CO: Westview Press, pp. 110.
Cutler, Lloyd N. (1988), ‘Some Reflections about Divided Government’, Presidential Studies Quarterly, 18 (3): 485–92.
Fiorina, Morris P. (1991), ‘Divided Government in the States’, in Cox, Gary W. and Kernell, Samuel (eds.), The Politics of Divided Government, Boulder, CO: Westview Press, pp. 179202.
Fiorina, Morris P. (1992), ‘An Era of Divided Government’, Political Science Quarterly, 107 (3): 387410.
Fiorina, Morris P. (1996), Divided Government, 2nd edn, New York: Allyn & Bacon.
Garand, James C. and Lichtl, Marci Glascock (2000), ‘Explaining Divided Government in the United States: Testing an Intentional Model of Split-Ticket Voting’, British Journal of Political Science, 30 (1): 173–91.
Geer, John G., Carter, Amy, McHenry, James, Teten, Ryan, and Hoef, Jennifer (2004), ‘Experimenting with the Balancing Hypothesis’, Political Psychology, 25 (1): 4963.
Gerring, John (1999), ‘What Makes a Concept Good? A Criterial Framework for Understanding Concept Formation in the Social Sciences’, Polity, 31 (3): 357–93.
Gideon, Lior (2012), ‘The Art of Question Phrasing’, in Gideon, Lior (ed.), Handbook of Survey Methodology for the Social Sciences, New York: Springer, pp. 91107.
Hsieh, John F. (2005), ‘Ethnicity, National Identity, and Domestic Politics in Taiwan’, Journal of Asian and African Studies, 40 (1/2): 1328.
Huang, Chi and Wu, Chung-li (2000), ‘The Effects of Divided Government on Public Evaluations of City/County Government Performance in Taiwan: A Pilot Study’, Taiwanese Political Science Review, 4: 106–47 (in Chinese).
Jacobson, Gary C. (1990), The Electoral Origins of Divided Government: Competition in the US House Elections, 1946–1988, Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
Jacobson, Gary C. (1991), ‘Explaining Divided Government: Why Can't Republicans Win the House’, PS: Political Science and Politics, 24 (4): 640–3.
Keith, Bruce E., Magleby, David B., Nelson, Candice J., Orr, Elizabeth, Westlyr, Mark C., and Wolfinger, Raymond E. (1992), The Myth of the Independent Voter, Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Kelly, Sean Q. (1993), ‘Divided We Govern? A Reassessment’, Polity, 25 (3): 475–84.
Lacy, Dean and Paolino, Philip (1998), ‘Downsian Voting and the Separation of Powers’, American Journal of Political Science, 42 (4): 1180–99.
Ladd, Everett C. (1989), ‘The 1988 Elections: Continuation of the Post-New Deal System’, Political Science Quarterly, 104 (1): 118.
Ladd, Everett C. (1990), ‘Public Opinion and the “Congress Problem”’, The National Affair, 100: 5767.
Lewis-Beck, Michael S. and Nadeau, Richard (2004), ‘Split-Ticket Voting: The Effects of Cognitive Madisonianism’, Journal of Politics, 66 (1): 97112.
Lupia, Arthur (2011), ‘How Do Political Scientists Know What Citizens Want? An Essay on Theory and Measurement’, in Sniderman, Paul M. and Highton, Benjamin (eds.), Facing the Challenge of Democracy: Explorations in the Analysis of Public Opinion and Political Participation, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, pp. 2346.
Mayhew, David R. (1991), Divided We Govern: Party Control, Lawmaking, and Investigations, 1946–1990, New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Moody, Peter R. Jr. (1992), Political Change in Taiwan, New York: Praeger.
Rosenstone, Steven J. and Hansen, John Mark (1993), Mobilization, Participation, and Democracy in America, New York: Macmillan.
Shyu, Huo-yan (1998), ‘The Political Psychology of Lee Teng-hui Complex and Its Effects on Voting Behavior’, Journal of Electoral Studies, 5 (2): 3571 (in Chinese).
Sigelman, Lee, Wahlbeck, Paul J., and Buell, Emmett H. Jr. (1997), ‘Vote Choice and the Preference for Divided Government: Lessons of 1992’, American Journal of Political Science, 41 (3): 879–94.
Smith, Charles E. Jr., Brown, Robert D., Bruce, John M., and Overby, L. Marvin (1999), ‘Party Balancing and Voting for Congress in the 1996 National Election’, American Journal of Political Science, 43 (3): 737–64.
Thurber, James A. (1991a), ‘Representation, Accountability, and Efficiency in Divided Party Control of Government’, PS: Political Science and Politics, 24 (4): 653–7.
Thurber, James A. (ed.) (1991b), Divided Democracy: Cooperation and Conflict between the President and Congress, Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly Press.
Watchman, Alan M. (1994), Taiwan: National Identity and Democratization, Armonk, NY: M. E. Sharpe.
Wu, Chung-li and Wang, Hung-chung (2003), ‘The Psychological Cognition for Divided Government and Electoral Stability in Taiwan: The Cases of the 2000 Presidential and 2001 Legislative Yuan Elections’, Journal of Electoral Studies, 10 (1): 81114 (in Chinese).
Wu, Chung-li (2008), ‘Party Preference, Cognitive Madisonianism, and Split-Ticket Voting: The 2006 Taipei and Kaohsiung Mayoral and City Council Elections’, Taiwan Democracy Quarterly, 5 (2): 2758 (in Chinese).
Yu, Ching-hsin (2004), ‘Explanations for Split-Ticket Voting and Their Applications to Taiwan's Election: A Case Study of the 2002 Elections for City Mayor and Councilors of Kaohsiung’, Taiwanese Political Science Review, 8 (1): 4798 (in Chinese).
Yu, Eric Chen-hua, Huang, Chi, and Hsiao, Yi-ching (2010), ‘Who Wants Checks and Balances? Endogeneity of the Balancing Perspective’, Paper presented at the 2010 Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, Washington, DC, 2–5 September.
Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

Japanese Journal of Political Science
  • ISSN: 1468-1099
  • EISSN: 1474-0060
  • URL: /core/journals/japanese-journal-of-political-science
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×

Metrics

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed