FIND DATA: By Journal | Sites   ANALYZE DATA: Help with R | SPSS | Stata | Excel   WHAT'S NEW? US Politics | IR | Law & Courts🎵
   FIND DATA: By Journal | Sites   WHAT'S NEW? US Politics | IR | Law & Courts🎵
WHAT'S NEW? US Politics | IR | Law & Courts🎵
If this link is broken, please
You can also
(will be reviewed).

Electoral Rules Shape Japanese Candidates' Ideological Positions: A Counterintuitive Look

Electoral ReformSingle-Member DistrictsMulti-Member DistrictsIdeological ConvergenceAsian Politics@APSR27 R files49 datasetsDataverse
Asian Politics subfield banner

Japan's electoral reform in 1994 sparked debate about how candidate positioning adapts. This study analyzes ~7,500 election manifestos using quantitative scaling to estimate ideology across eight House of Representatives elections. We find a clear pattern: candidates' positions converge dramatically under single-member districts (SMDs), while diverging significantly within multimember districts (MMDs). When intraparty competition is absent in MMDs, partisan alignment becomes stronger - the opposite effect previously expected from spatial theories.

🔍 Data & Methods

* Analyzed ~7,500 Japanese election manifestos post-reform.

* Used advanced quantitative scaling to measure ideology objectively.

📊 Key Findings

* Candidates move ideologically toward the center in Single-Member Districts.

* They diverge dramatically within Multi-Member Districts (MMDs).

* Without intraparty competition, candidates in MMDs align even more strongly with their partisans.

💡 Why It Matters

This nuanced result clarifies the relationship between electoral systems and Japanese political behavior. The divergence without copartisans challenges conventional spatial theory expectations.

Article card for article: Positioning under Alternative Electoral Systems: Evidence from Japanese Candidate Election Manifestos
Positioning under Alternative Electoral Systems: Evidence from Japanese Candidate Election Manifestos was authored by Amy Catalinac. It was published by Cambridge in APSR in 2018.
Find on Google Scholar
Find on Cambridge University Press
American Political Science Review