Hostname: page-component-7bb8b95d7b-pwrkn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-09-13T14:33:27.129Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Forewarned Before Forecast: Presidential Election Forecasting Models and the 1992 Election

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2013

Jay P. Greene
Jay P. Greene*
Affiliation:
Harvard University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Forecasting presidential elections has become a growth industry in political science. Econometric models used to predict the presidential election that were once viewed as part of “recreational political science” are now being taken seriously. The widespread belief that these models have been highly successful at predicting election outcomes has enticed a score of political scientists to propose new models hoping to share in the triumph of political science over the pundits and polls. Unfortunately, there has been very little critical examination of the models used to forecast presidential elections. A close review reveals that existing quantitative models are not useful predictors of presidential races. In addition, most of the new proposed models have adopted an approach that is unlikely to lead to better forecasts.

Type
Research Article
Information
PS: Political Science & Politics , Volume 26 , Issue 1 , March 1993 , pp. 17 - 21
Copyright
Copyright © The 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.)

Footnotes

1.

I would like to thank Alan Abramowitz, James Campbell, Ray Fair, Michael Lewis-Beck, and Tom Rice for providing me with their data. I would also like to thank Mo Fiorina, Gary King, Aleza Spalter Greene, and Paul Peterson for their helpful comments and advice on this paper. The staff and regular patrons of the Harvard Data Center also provided valuable comments on an earlier draft.

References

Abramowitz, Alan I. 1988. “An Improved Model for Predicting Presidential Election Outcomes.” PS, 21:843–47.Google Scholar
Beck, Nathaniel. 1992. “Forecasting the 1992 Presidential Election: The Message Is in the Confidence Interval.” The Public Perspective, 3 (6, September/October).Google Scholar
Campbell, James E. 1992. “Forecasting the Presidential Vote in the States.” American Journal of Political Science, 36(2): 386–407.10.2307/2111483CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campbell, James E., and Mann, Thomas E. 1992. “Forecasting the 1992 Presidential Election: A User's Guide to the Models.” The Brookings Review, Fall.Google Scholar
Fair, Ray C. 1990. “The Effect of Economic Events on Votes for the President: 1988 Update.” Mimeo, November.Google Scholar
Fair, Ray C. 1988. “The Effect of Economic Events on Votes for President: 1984 Update.” Political Behavior, 10(2): 168–79.10.1007/BF00991412CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fair, Ray C. 1982. “The Effect of Economic Events on Votes for President: 1980 Results.” Review of Economics and Statistics, 64(2):322–25.10.2307/1924312CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fair, Ray C. 1978. “The Effect of Economic Events on Votes for President.” Review of Economics and Statistics, 60(2): 159–73.Google Scholar
Lewis-Beck, Michael S. and Rice, Tom W. 1992. Forecasting Elections. Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly Press.Google Scholar
Lewis-Beck, Michael S. and Rice, Tom W. 1985. “Election Forecasts in 1984: How Accurate Were They?” PS, 18(1):53–62.10.2307/418806CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kmenta, Jan. 1986. Elements of Econometrics. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar