Using Conjoint Experiments to Analyze Election Outcomes: The Essential Role of the Average Marginal Component Effect

被引:49
作者
Bansak, Kirk [1 ]
Hainmueller, Jens [2 ]
Hopkins, Daniel J. [3 ]
Yamamoto, Teppei [4 ]
机构
[1] Univ Calif Berkeley, Dept Polit Sci, 210 Social Sci Bldg, Berkeley, CA 94720 USA
[2] Stanford Univ, Dept Polit Sci, 616 Serra St,Encina Hall West,Room 100, Stanford, CA 94305 USA
[3] Univ Penn, Dept Polit Sci, Perelman Ctr Polit Sci & Econ, 133 S 36th St, Philadelphia, PA 19104 USA
[4] MIT, Dept Polit Sci, 77 Massachusetts Ave, Cambridge, MA 02139 USA
关键词
survey experiments; elections; conjoint; Average Marginal Component Effect; voter preferences;
D O I
10.1017/pan.2022.16
中图分类号
O1 [数学]; C [社会科学总论];
学科分类号
03 ; 0303 ; 0701 ; 070101 ;
摘要
Political scientists have increasingly deployed conjoint survey experiments to understand multidimensional choices in various settings. In this paper, we show that the average marginal component effect (AMCE) constitutes an aggregation of individual-level preferences that is meaningful both theoretically and empirically. First, extending previous results to allow for arbitrary randomization distributions, we show how the AMCE represents a summary of voters' multidimensional preferences that combines directionality and intensity according to a probabilistic generalization of the Borda rule. We demonstrate why incorporating both the directionality and intensity of multi-attribute preferences is essential for analyzing real-world elections, in which ceteris paribus comparisons almost never occur. Second, and in further empirical support of this point, we show how this aggregation translates directly into a primary quantity of interest to election scholars: the effect of a change in an attribute on a candidate's or party's expected vote share. These properties hold irrespective of the heterogeneity, strength, or interactivity of voters' preferences and regardless of how votes are aggregated into seats. Finally, we propose, formalize, and evaluate the feasibility of using conjoint data to estimate alternative quantities of interest to electoral studies, including the effect of an attribute on the probability of winning.
引用
收藏
页码:500 / 518
页数:19
相关论文
共 25 条
[1]   What Do We Learn about Voter Preferences from Conjoint Experiments? [J].
Abramson, Scott F. ;
Kocak, Korhan ;
Magazinnik, Asya .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF POLITICAL SCIENCE, 2022, 66 (04) :1008-1020
[2]  
Achen ChristopherH., 2016, DEMOCRACY REALISTS W
[3]   Americans preferred Syrian refugees who are female, English-speaking, and Christian on the eve of Donald Trump's election [J].
Adida, Claire L. ;
Lo, Adeline ;
Platas, Melina R. .
PLOS ONE, 2019, 14 (10)
[4]   How Clients Select Brokers: Competition and Choice in India's Slums [J].
Auerbach, Adam Michael ;
Thachil, Tariq .
AMERICAN POLITICAL SCIENCE REVIEW, 2018, 112 (04) :775-791
[5]  
Bansak K., 2022, HARVARD DATAVERSE, pV1, DOI [10.7910/DVN/NBRBHO, DOI 10.7910/DVN/NBRBHO]
[6]   Why Austerity? The Mass Politics of a Contested Policy [J].
Bansak, Kirk ;
Bechtel, Michael M. ;
Margalit, Yotam .
AMERICAN POLITICAL SCIENCE REVIEW, 2021, 115 (02) :486-505
[7]   Beyond the breaking point? Survey satisficing in conjoint experiments [J].
Bansak, Kirk ;
Hainmueller, Jens ;
Hopkins, Daniel J. ;
Yamamoto, Teppei .
POLITICAL SCIENCE RESEARCH AND METHODS, 2021, 9 (01) :53-71
[8]   How economic, humanitarian, and religious concerns shape European attitudes toward asylum seekers [J].
Bansak, Kirk ;
Hainmueller, Jens ;
Hangartner, Dominik .
SCIENCE, 2016, 354 (6309) :217-222
[9]  
Bansak Kirk., 2021, Adv Exp Polit Sci, DOI [DOI 10.1017/9781108777919.004, 10.1017/9781108777919.004]
[10]  
Campbell Angus., 1960, The American Voter