scholarly journals When Should Political Scientists Use the Self-Confirming Equilibrium Concept? Benefits, Costs, and an Application to Jury Theorems

2010 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
pp. 103-123 ◽  
Author(s):  
Arthur Lupia ◽  
Adam Seth Levine ◽  
Natasha Zharinova
Keyword(s):  
Political Science ◽  
Political Behavior ◽  
American Political Science Review ◽  
Strategic Voting ◽  
The Self ◽  
Equilibrium Concept ◽  
Political Actors ◽  
Jury Verdicts ◽  
Game Theoretic ◽  
American Political Science

Many claims about political behavior are based on implicit assumptions about how people think. One such assumption, that political actors use identical conjectures when assessing others' strategies, is nested within applications of widely used game-theoretic equilibrium concepts. When empirical findings call this assumption into question, the self-confirming equilibrium (SCE) concept provides an alternate criterion for theoretical claims. We examine applications of SCE to political science. Our main example focuses on the claim of Feddersen and Pesendorfer that unanimity rule can lead juries to convict innocent defendants (1998. Convicting the innocent: The inferiority of unanimous jury verdicts under strategic voting.American Political Science Review92:23–35). We show that the claim depends on the assumption that jurors have identical beliefs about one another's types and identical conjectures about one another's strategies. When jurors' beliefs and conjectures vary in ways documented by empirical jury research, fewer false convictions can occur in equilibrium. The SCE concept can confer inferential advantages when actors have different beliefs and conjectures about one another.

The Threat of Genes: A Comment on Evan Charney's “Genes and Ideologies”

2008 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 329-335 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rebecca J. Hannagan ◽  
Peter K. Hatemi
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Biological Sciences ◽  
Political Science ◽  
Political Behavior ◽  
American Political Science Review ◽  
Theoretical Models ◽  
Science Review ◽  
The Social ◽  
American Political Science

In his essay, “Genes and Ideologies,” Evan Charney wrangles with the question of the role of genes in the formation of political attitudes via a critique of Alford, Funk, and Hibbing's 2005 American Political Science Review article. Although critical evaluations are necessary, his essay falls short of what is required of a scientific critique on both empirical and theoretical grounds. We offer a comment on his essay and further contend that it is naïve to proceed on the assumption that a barrier exists between the biological and social sciences, such that the biological sciences have nothing to offer the social sciences. If we look beyond our discipline's current theoretical models we may find a more thorough, and not just competing, explanation of political behavior.

A Response to Jeffrey Isaac

2010 ◽  
Vol 43 (04) ◽  
pp. 739
Author(s):  
Gregory J. Kasza
Keyword(s):  
Political Science ◽  
American Political Science Review ◽  
Comparable Data ◽  
Science Review ◽  
Political Research ◽  
The Past ◽  
Regional Association ◽  
American Political Science

The purpose of the present symposium was to evaluate Perestroika's impact. Since theAmerican Political Science Review(APSR), theAmerican Journal of Political Science(AJPS), and theJournal of Politics(JOP) were all targets of criticism in the movement, whereas other national and regional association journals such asPerspectives on PoliticsandPolitical Research Quarterlywere not, I looked for change in the former. Comparable data on the past contents of theAPSRandAJPShad already been published, so I focused my recent surveys on those two. This focus implies no judgment as to the relative prestige of these journals. They pretend to represent the discipline as a whole and are paid for by all association members, and these are sufficient reasons to address their editorial biases.

In Defense of Genopolitics

2013 ◽  
Vol 107 (2) ◽  
pp. 362-374 ◽  
Author(s):  
JAMES H. FOWLER ◽  
CHRISTOPHER T. DAWES
Keyword(s):  
Political Science ◽  
Voter Turnout ◽  
Church Attendance ◽  
Behavior Genetics ◽  
American Political Science Review ◽  
Environment Interaction ◽  
Gene Environment Interaction ◽  
National Longitudinal Study ◽  
Gene Environment ◽  
American Political Science

The American Political Science Review recently published a critique of an article we published in the Journal of Politics in 2008. In that article we showed that variants of the genes 5HTT and MAOA were significantly associated with voter turnout in a sample of 2,300 subjects from the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health. Here, we address the critique first by conducting a replication study using an independent sample of 9,300 subjects. This study replicates the gene-environment interaction of the 5HTT gene variant with church attendance, but not the association with MAOA. We then focus on the general argument of the critique, showing that many of its characterizations of the literature in genetics and in political science are misleading or incorrect. We conclude by illustrating the ways in which genopolitics has already made a lasting contribution to the field of political science and by offering guidelines for future studies in genopolitics that are based on state-of-the-art recommendations from the field of behavior genetics.

Reviewing the Reviewers: Ideological Bias in the APSR Book Section

1974 ◽  
Vol 7 (04) ◽  
pp. 370-374
Author(s):  
Michael Parenti
Keyword(s):  
Cold War ◽  
International Relations ◽  
Political Science ◽  
American Political Science Review ◽  
Free World ◽  
Review Section ◽  
Ideological Bias ◽  
American Political Science

I would like to give attention to that portion of theAmerican Political Science Reviewwhich is most read and least criticized, the book review section. My reading ofAPSRbook reviews in recent years leads me to the following observations:Most of the books selected for review adhere to the orthodox ideological values of today's political establishment. More importantly, these books almost invariably are reviewed by political scientists who share the same centrist ideological slant as the authors they are reviewing. In the reviews dealing with international relations, for instance, cold war terms like “totalitarianism”, “Castroism”, “subversion” and “Free World” are employed uncritically. Western capitalist nations are described as having “governments”, while socialist nations are said to have “regimes”, usually identified as being under the tutelage of one personage, hence: “Mao Tse-tung's regime”, and “Fidel Castro's Cuba”. The idea that popular sentiments and democratic in-puts might be part of the governance of countries like Cuba or China is not entertained.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document