The DOI matches its Crossref record; 10 of the 10 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Strategic Voting in Britain
Abstract
Formal political theory has raised serious doubts about the existence of strategic voting, and this in turn has challenged the prevailing wisdom in comparative politics about phenomena like "squeezing" and the effect of the "wasted vote." This paper attempts to set out the conditions for strategic voting and to test for it using data from the 1970 British General election. The results from both an aggregate and a survey analysis indicate that individuals are more likely to vote for their second preference when they perceive that their first choice has little chance of winning. This effect is particularly strong when the next best party is at a margin of under five percent.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Hannan, E. J. (1973) · Technometrics · doi:10.1080/00401706.1973.10489024 · Cited by 3,210
A Theory of the Calculus of Voting
Riker, W. H., & Ordeshook, P. C. (1968) · American Political Science Review · doi:10.1017/s000305540011562x · Cited by 2,883
Statistical Methods for Social Scientists
(1977) · Elsevier eBooks · doi:10.1016/c2009-0-22083-6 · Cited by 1,880
The Political Consequences of Electoral Laws
Groennings, S., & Rae, D. W. (1968) · The Western Political Quarterly · doi:10.2307/446528 · Cited by 1,766
Butler, D., & Stokes, D. (1971) · Palgrave Macmillan UK eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-1-349-00140-8 · Cited by 822
Farquharson, R. (1969) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 608
The Paradox of Not Voting: A Decision Theoretic Analysis
Ferejohn, J., & Fiorina, M. P. (1974) · American Political Science Review · doi:10.1017/s0003055400117368 · Cited by 578
On the Estimation of Relationships Involving Qualitative Variables
Theil, H. (1970) · American Journal of Sociology · doi:10.1086/224909 · Cited by 373
Univariate and Multivariate Log-Linear and Logistic Models
Nerlove, M., & Press, S. J. (1973) · Cited by 336
Is Minimax Regret Applicable to Voting Decisions?
Mayer, L. S., & Good, I. J. (1975) · American Political Science Review · doi:10.2307/1958402 · Cited by 33
Cited by
Voter Turnout and the Dynamics of Electoral Competition in Established Democracies since 1945
Franklin, M. N., Eijk, C. V. D., Evans, D., Fotos, M., Hirczy de Mino, W., Marsh, M., & Wessels, B. (2004) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511616884 · Cited by 1,421
Aldrich, J. H. (1993) · American Journal of Political Science · doi:10.2307/2111531 · Cited by 1,203
Voter ideology in western democracies, 1946–1989
Kim, H., & Fording, R. C. (1998) · European Journal of Political Research · doi:10.1023/a:1006882806861 · Cited by 323
“Sophisticated” Voting in the 1988 Presidential Primaries
Abramson, P. R., Aldrich, J. H., Paolino, P., & Rohde, D. W. (1992) · American Political Science Review · doi:10.2307/1964015 · Cited by 309
Leech, B. L. (2010) · The Oxford Handbook of American Political Parties and Interest Groups · doi:10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199542628.003.0028 · Cited by 91
Metadata
- Authors
- Cain, B. E.
- Venue
- American Journal of Political Science
- Publisher
- JSTOR
- Published
- 1978-08
- Volume
- 22
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 639
- ISSN
- 0092-5853 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1974645880
- Cited by
- 318
- References
- 10
- FWCI
- 9.43
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Strategic Voting in Britain. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2307/2110465
- The paper
- Cain, B. E. (1978). Strategic Voting in Britain. American Journal of Political Science. https://doi.org/10.2307/2110465
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
