MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2548149488 · doi:10.1177/0263774x16676272

Fewer voters, higher stakes? The applicability of rational choice for voter turnout in Quebec municipalities

2016· article· en· W2548149488 on OpenAlex
Sandra Breux, Jérôme Couture, Nicole Goodman

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironment and Planning C Politics and Space · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicElectoral Systems and Political Participation
Canadian institutionsGlobal Affairs CanadaInstitut National de la Recherche Scientifique
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVoter turnoutVoter modelVotingTurnoutPolitical scienceDemographic economicsPoliticsEconomicsPublic economicsPublic administrationEconometricsStatisticsMathematicsLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Municipal voter turnout is often considered to be a function of electorate size. According to the rational choice theory of voter behavior, a rational voter is more inclined to abstain in the presence of larger electorates, and more likely to participate in smaller ones. This article examines the impact of electorate size on voter turnout using a multivariate regression model to explain voter participation in Quebec municipalities in the 2009 and 2013 local elections ( N = 1040). Several other assumptions pertaining to the rational voter are also tested. We find that rational choice theory explains 45% of municipal voter participation in these Quebec elections and that it supports the probability of pivotal voting. Our analysis also confirms that the number of electors, number of mayoral candidates, tax rate, presence of a political party, and incumbency have different effects on participation in small and large municipalities.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.479
Threshold uncertainty score0.960

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.043
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.268 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it