Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorGelman, Andrew
dc.contributor.authorKing, Gary
dc.contributor.authorBoscardin, John
dc.date.accessioned2010-06-29T19:35:52Z
dc.date.issued1998
dc.identifier.citationGelman, Andrew, Gary King and John Boscardin. 1998. Estimating the probability of events that have never occurred: when is your vote decisive? Journal of the American Statistical Association 93(441): 1-9.en_US
dc.identifier.issn0162-1459en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:4266309
dc.description.abstractResearchers sometimes argue that statisticians have little to contribute when few realizations of the process being estimated are observed. We show that this argument is incorrect even in the extreme situation of estimating the probabilities of events so rare that they have never occurred. We show how statistical forecasting models allow us to use empirical data to improve inferences about the probabilities of these events. Our application is estimating the probability that your vote will be decisive in a U.S. presidential election, a problem that has been studied by political scientists for more than two decades. The exact value of this probability is of only minor interest, but the number has important implications for understanding the optimal allocation of campaign resources, whether states and voter groups receive their fair share of attention from prospective presidents, and how formal "rational choice" models of voter behavior might be able to explain why people vote at all. We show how the probability of a decisive vote can be estimated empirically from state-level forecasts of the presidential election and illustrate with the example of 1992. Based on generalizations of standard political science forecasting models, we estimate the (prospective) probability of a single vote being decisive as about 1 in 10 million for close national elections such as 1992, varying by about a factor of 10 among states. Our results support the argument that subjective probabilities of many types are best obtained through empirically based statistical prediction models rather than solely through mathematical reasoning. We discuss the implications of our findings for the types of decision analyses used in public choice studies.en_US
dc.language.isoen_USen_US
dc.publisherAmerican Statistical Associationen_US
dc.relation.isversionofdoi:10.2307/2669597en_US
dc.relation.hasversionhttp://j.mp/1AzwdN0en_US
dash.licenseLAA
dc.subjectconditional probabilityen_US
dc.subjectdecision analysisen_US
dc.subjectelectionen_US
dc.subjectelectoral campaigningen_US
dc.subjectforecastingen_US
dc.subjectpolitical scienceen_US
dc.subjectpresidential electionen_US
dc.subjectrare eventen_US
dc.subjectrational choiceen_US
dc.subjectsubjective probabilityen_US
dc.subjectvoting poweren_US
dc.titleEstimating the Probability of Events that Have Never Occurred: When is Your Vote Decisive?en_US
dc.typeJournal Articleen_US
dc.description.versionVersion of Recorden_US
dc.relation.journalJournal -- American Statistical Associationen_US
dash.depositing.authorKing, Gary
dc.date.available2010-06-29T19:35:52Z
dc.data.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/1902.1/NOLXXTUHNZ
dc.data.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/1902.1/NOLXXTUHNZen_US
dc.identifier.doi10.2307/2669597*
dash.identifier.orcid0000-0002-5327-7631*
dash.contributor.affiliatedKing, Gary
dc.identifier.orcid0000-0002-5327-7631


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record