Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-27T23:37:27.652Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Rejoinder to “Comments” by Richard A. Brody and Benjamin I. Page and John H. Kessel

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 August 2014

Richard W. Boyd*
Affiliation:
Wesleyan University

Abstract

Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Articles
Copyright
Copyright © American Political Science Association 1972

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 This is true of all of the issues included in Figure 5 of my original article.

2 Key, V. O. Jr., The Responsible Electorate (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1966), p. 47 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

3 Key, p. 78.

4 Pomper, Gerald M., “Toward a More Responsible Two-Party System? What, Again?Journal of Politics, 33 (11., 1971), pp. 916–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

5 Pomper, pp. 925–26.

6 Brody, Richard A. and Page, Benjamin I., “The Assessment of Policy Voting: A Commentary,” American Political Science Review, 66 (06, 1972), 450458 CrossRefGoogle Scholar, and Shapiro, Michael J., “Rational Political Man: A Synthesis of Economic and Social-Psychological Perspectives,” American Political Science Review, 63 (12, 1969), 1106–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

7 This undoubtedly is why Davis, Hinich, and Ordeshook assumed that “all citizens make identical estimates” of candidates' stands on issues. Davis, Otto A., Hinich, Melvin J., and Ordeshook, Peter C., “An Expository Development of a Mathematical Model of the Electoral Process,” American Political Science Review 64 (06, 1970), 431 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

Submit a response

Comments

No Comments have been published for this article.