This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Claassen, R. L. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Ideology and Evaluation in an Experimental Setting

Comparing the Proximity and the Directional Models

Kent State University, Ohio

The debate between which model, directional or proximity, better describes citizens' political behavior engages scholars because the former constitutes a serious challenge to long-standing, Downsian, spatial logic. Despite an engaging series of empirical tests, scholars comparing the two models continue to disagree about which model performs better. Noting experimental methods remain conspicuously absent from methods deployed to date, the author describes an experiment designed to settle key assumption debates and measure subjects' reactions to candidates in contexts in which the models make very different predictions. The author reports results vindicating Downs's assertion that proximity matters and direction does not.

Key Words: proximity model • directional model • spatial model • candidate evaluation • experimental research • extremism • ideology

Political Research Quarterly, Vol. 60, No. 2, 263-273 (2007)
DOI: 10.1177/1065912907302050


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				R. L. Claassen Direction Versus Proximity: Amassing Experimental Evidence American Politics Research, March 1, 2009; 37(2): 227 - 253. [Abstract] [PDF]