Hostname: page-component-857557d7f7-bkbbk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-11-21T14:51:33.262Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A Signaling Model of Informative and Manipulative Political Action

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2013

Susanne Lohmann
Susanne Lohmann
Affiliation:
Stanford University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

I develop a signaling model of mass political action. I establish that rational, self-interested individuals may have incentives to engage in costly political action despite a free-rider problem. Their political actions are informative for a political leader who rationally takes a cue from the size of the protest movement. However, some information is trapped in extremist and rationally apathetic pockets of the society. Some extremists take political action regardless of their private information, to manipulate the political leader's decision. Others abstain hoping to benefit if the leader makes an uninformed decision. Rationally apathetic moderates abstain because, being nearly indifferent between the policy alternatives, they do not find it worthwhile to incur the cost of taking action. Only activist moderates take informative political action. The political leader discounts the observed turnout for extremist political action and shifts policy if the estimated number of activist moderates exceeds a critical threshold.

Information

Type
Articles
Information
American Political Science Review , Volume 87 , Issue 2 , June 1993 , pp. 319 - 333
Copyright
Copyright © American Political Science Association 1993

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.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Ainsworth, Scott, and Sened, Itai. 1991. “The Role of Lobbyists: Entrepreneurs with Two Audiences.” University of Georgia. Mimeograph.Google Scholar
Austen-Smith, David, and Wright, John R.. 1990. “Competitive Lobbying for Legislators' Votes.” University of Rochester. Mimeograph.Google Scholar
Ball, Richard. 1991. “Political Lobbying as Welfare Improving Signaling.” University of California, Berkeley. Mimeograph.Google Scholar
Banks, Jeffrey S., and Sobel, Joel. 1987. “Equilibrium Selection in Signaling Games.” Econometrica 55:647–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barnes, Samuel H., and Kaase, Max, eds. 1979. Political Action: Mass Participation in Five Western Democracies. Beverly Hills: Sage.Google Scholar
Baron, David P. 1988. “Regulatory Incentive Mechanisms, Commitment, and Political Action.” Graduate School of Business Research Paper No. 1028. Stanford University.Google Scholar
Calvert, Randall. 1985. “The Value of Biased Information: A Rational Choice Model of Political Advice.” Journal of Politics 47:530–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cho, In-koo and Kreps, David. 1987. “Signaling Games and Stable Equilibria.” Quarterly Journal of Economics 102:179–221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Converse, Philip E. 1964. “The Nature of Belief Systems in Mass Publics.” In Ideology and Discontent, ed. Apter, David E.. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Crawford, V., and Sobel, Joel. 1982. “Strategic Information Transmission.” Econometrica 50:1431–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cukierman, Alex. 1991. “Asymmetric Information and the Electoral Momentum of Public Opinion Polls.” Public Choice 70:181–214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DeNardo, James. 1985. Power in Numbers. Princeton: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Downs, Anthony. 1957. An Economic Theory of Democracy. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
Enelow, James M., and Hinich, Melvin J.. 1990. “The Theory of Predictive Mappings.” In Advances in the Spatial Theory of Voting, ed. Enelow, James M. and Hinich, Melvin J.. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Finkel, Steven E., Muller, Edward N., and Opp, Karl-Dieter. 1989. “Personal Influence, Collective Rationality, and Mass Political Action.” American Political Science Review 83:885–905.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gilligan, T., and Krehbiel, Keith. 1987. “Collective Decision-Making and Standing Committees: An Informational Rationale for Restrictive Amendment Procedures.” Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization 3:287–335.Google Scholar
Kreps, David M. 1989. “Out-of-Equilibrium Beliefs and Out-of-Equilibrium Behavior.” In The Economics of Missing Markets, Information, and Games, ed. Hahn, Frank. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Kreps, David M., and Wilson, Robert. 1982. “Sequential Equilibria.” Econometrica 50:863–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ledyard, John O. 1984. “The Pure Theory of Large Two-Candidate Elections.” Public Choice 44:7–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lipsky, Michael. 1970. Protest in City Politics: Rent Strikes, Housing, and the Power of the Poor. Chicago: Rand McNally.Google Scholar
Lohmann, Susanne. 1992a. “Competitive Political Action.” Graduate School of Business Research Paper No. 1202a. Stanford University.Google Scholar
Lohmann, Susanne. 1992b. “Information Aggregation through Costly Political Action.” Graduate School of Business Research Paper No. 1130b. Stanford University.Google Scholar
Lohmann, Susanne. 1992c. “Rationality, Revolution and Revolt: The Dynamics of Informational Cascades.” Graduate School of Business Research Paper No. 1213a. Stanford University.Google Scholar
Lohmann, Susanne. N.d. “A Welfare Analysis of Political Action.” In Political Economy: Institutions, Information, Competition, and Representation, ed. Barnett, William, Hinich, Melvin, and Schofield, Norman. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Forthcoming.Google Scholar
McKelvey, Richard D., and Ordeshook, Peter C.. 1985. “Elections with Limited Information: A Fulfilled Expectations Model Using Contemporaneous Poll and Endorsement Data as Information Sources.” Journal of Economic Theory 36:55–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Matthews, Steven A. 1989. “Veto Threats: Rhetoric in a Bargaining Game.” Quarterly Journal of Economics 104:347–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Milgrom, Paul, and Roberts, John. 1986. “Relying on the Information of Interested Parties.” Rand Journal of Economics 17:18–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nie, Norman H., and Verba, Sidney. 1975. “Political Participation.” In Nongovernmental Politics, vol. 4 of Handbook of Political Science, ed. Greenstein, Fred I. and Polsby, Nelson W.. Reading: Addison-Welsley.Google Scholar
Olson, Mancur. 1965. The Logic of Collective Action. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Opp, Karl-Dieter. 1989. The Rationality of Political Protest: A Comparative Analysis of Rational Choice Theory. Boulder: Westview.Google Scholar
Palfrey, Thomas R., and Rosenthal, Howard. 1984. “Participation and the Provision of Discrete Public Goods: A Strategic Analysis.” Journal of Public Economics 24:171–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Palfrey, Thomas R., and Rosenthal, Howard. 1985. “Voter Participation and Strategic Uncertainty.” American Political Science Review 79:62–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rasmusen, Eric. 1991. “Costly Lobbying as a Signal of Conviction.” Yale Law School. Mimeograph.Google Scholar
Riker, William H., and Ordeshook, Peter C.. 1968. “A Theory of the Calculus of Voting.” American Political Science Review 62:28–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rochon, Thomas R. 1990. “Political Movements and State Authority in Liberal Democracies.” World Politics 42:299–313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schumpeter, Joseph A. 1942. Capitalism, Socialism, and Democracy. New York: Harper & Brothers.Google Scholar
Selten, Reinhard. 1975. “Reexamination of the Perfectness Concept for Equilibrium Points in Extensive Games.” International Journal of Game Theory 4:25–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sundquist, James L. 1983. Dynamics of the Party System: Alignment and Realignment of Political Parties in the United States.Rev. ed. Washington: Brookings Institution.Google Scholar
Tarrow, Sidney. 1989. Struggle, Politics, and Reform: Collective Action, Social Movements, and Cycles of Protest. Western Societies Program Occasional Paper No. 21. Cornell University Center for International Studies.Google Scholar
Tarrow, Sidney. 1991. “‘Aiming at a Moving Target’: Social Science and the Recent Rebellions in Eastern Europe.” Political Science and Politics 24:12–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Verba, Sidney, and Brody, Richard A.. 1970. “Participation, Preferences, and the War in Vietnam.” Public Opinion Quarterly 34:325–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walker, Jack L. 1966. “A Critique of the Elitist Theory of Democracy.” American Political Science Review 60:285–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Submit a response

Comments

No Comments have been published for this article.