La repercusión electoral de los escándalos políticos. Alcance y condiciones

  1. Jiménez Gómez, Fernando
  2. Caínzos López, Miguel Ángel
Revista:
Revista española de ciencia política

ISSN: 1575-6548

Año de publicación: 2004

Número: 10

Páginas: 141-170

Tipo: Artículo

DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR

Otras publicaciones en: Revista española de ciencia política

Resumen

Partiendo de la literatura empírica sobre las consecuencias electorales de los escándalos políticos, nuestro trabajo tiene dos objetivos: por un lado, se proporciona una panorámica de las evidencias disponibles sobre la magnitud de los efectos de los escándalos sobre el voto. Encontramos que los escándalos tienen un efecto no despreciable sobre el voto, aunque tal impacto no suele dar lugar a un fuerte descenso del apoyo electoral al candidato afectado por el caso y, en muchas ocasiones, no supone su derrota. Por otro lado, y más importante aún, identificamos los factores que condicionan el impacto de un escándalo sobre el comportamiento electoral de los ciudadanos.

Referencias bibliográficas

  • Ahuja, S., S. L. Beavers, C. Berreau, A. Dodson, P. Hourigan, S. Showalter, J. Walz, y J. R. Hibbing. 1994. «Modern congressional election theory meets the 1992 house elections», Political Research Quarterly, 47 (4): 909-921.
  • Alford, J., H. Teeters, D. S. Ward, y R. K. Wilson. 1994. «Overdraft: The political cost of congressional malfeasance», The Journal of Politics, 56 (3): 788-801.
  • Anderson, C. J., y J. Ishii. 1997. «The political economy of election outcomes in Japan», British Journal of Political Science, 27 (4): 619-630.
  • Andreu Abela, J. 1998. Los españoles: opinión sobre sí mismos, España y el mundo. Análisis longitudinal. Escala de Cantril. Granada: Universidad de Granada.
  • Banducci, S. A., y J. A. Karp. 1994. «Electoral consequences of scandal and reapportionment in the 1992 house elections», American Politics Quarterly, 22 (1): 3-26.
  • Barbeito, R. L. 1997. «Preferencias electorales», en A. de Miguel, ed., La sociedad española 1996-1997. Madrid: Editorial Complutense.
  • Barreiro, B., e I. Sánchez-Cuenca. 2000. «Las consecuencias electorales de la corrupción», Historia y Política, 4: 69-92.
  • Bouissou, Jean Marie. 1994. «Décomposition et recomposition politique au Japon: entre “rien n’a changé” et “tout est possible”», Pouvoirs, 71: 25-42, invierno.
  • Caínzos, M., y F. Jiménez. 2000. «El impacto de los escándalos de corrupción sobre el voto en las elecciones generales de 1996», Historia y Política, 4: 93-132.
  • Caínzos, M. (En preparación). «Las condiciones del voto basado en la evaluación racional de la acción de gobierno».
  • CECS. 1995. España 1994. Madrid: Fundación Encuentro.
  • Chanley, V., J. L. Sullivan, M. H. Gonzales, y M. B. Kovera. 1994. «Lust and avarice in politics. Damage control by four politicians accused of wrongdoing (or, politics as usual)», American Politics Quarterly, 22 (3): 297-333.
  • Clarke, H. D., M. C. Stewart, y P. F. Whiteley. 1998. «New models for new labour: The political economy of labour party support, January 1992-April 1997», American Political Science Review, 92 (3): 559-575.
  • Conway, M. M., y M. L. Wyckoff. 1980. «Voter Choice in the 1974 Congressional Election», American Politics Quarterly, 8 (1): 3-13.
  • Criado, H. 2003. Competir para ganar. La lógica estratégica de la movilización electoral del PP y el PSOE en 1996 y 2000. Tesis doctoral. Instituto Juan March y Universidad Autónoma de Madrid.
  • Dimitras, P. E. 1989. «Greece», Electoral Studies, 8 (3): 270-280.
  • Dimitras, P. E. 1990. «The Greek parliamentary election of november 1989», Electoral Studies, 9 (2): 159-163.
  • Dimock, M., y G. Jacobson. 1995. «Checks and choices: The House Bank scandal’s impact on voters in 1992», The Journal of Politics, 57 (4): 1143-59.
  • Dobratz, B. A., y S. Whitfield. 1992. «Does scandal influences voters’ party preference? The case of Greece during the Papandreou era», European Sociological Review, 8 (2): 167-180.
  • Domínguez, J. I., y J. A. McCann. 1996. Democratizing Mexico: Public opinion and electoral choices. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
  • Fackler, T., y T. Lin. 1995. «Political corruption and presidential elections, 1929-1992», The Journal of Politics, 57 (4): 971-993.
  • Farrell, D. M., I. McAllister, y D. T. Studlar. 1998. «Sex, money and politics: Sleaze and conservative incumbency in the 1997 British election», en D. Denver, ed., British elections and parties review 1998. Londres: Frank Cass.
  • Featherstone, K. 1990. «The party-state in Greece and the fall of Papandreou», West European Politics, 13: 101-115.
  • Fiorina, M. 1981. Retrospective voting in American national elections. New Haven: Yale University Press.
  • Fiorina, M., S. Abram, y J. Pope. 2003. «The 2000 US presidential election: Can retrospective voting be saved?», British Journal of Political Science, 33: 163-187.
  • Fraile, M. 2001. Does the economy enter the ballot-box? A study of the Spanish voters’ decisions. Tesis doctoral. Madrid: Instituto Juan March.
  • Franklin, M., R. Niemi, y G. Whitten. 1994. «The two faces of tactical voting», British Journal of Political Science, 24 (4): 549-559.
  • Funk, C. L. 1996. «The impact of scandal on candidate evaluations: An experimental test of the role of candidate traits», Political Behaviour, 18 (4): 1-24.
  • Gerchunoff, P., y J. C. Torre. 1996. «La política de liberalización económica en la administración de Menem», Desarrollo Económico, 36 (143): 733-768.
  • Gil Calvo, E. 2003. «Caudillismo plebiscitario y “fair play”», Claves, 137: 36-42.
  • Glass, D. P. 1985. «Evaluating presidential candidates: Who focuses on their personal attributes?», Public Opinion Quarterly, 49: 517-534.
  • Gonzales, M. H., M. B. Kovera, J. L. Sullivan, y V. Chanley. 1995. «Private reactions to public transgressions: Predictors of evaluative responses to allegations of political misconduct», Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 21 (2): 136-148.
  • Groseclose, T., y K. Krehbiel. 1994. «Golden parachutes, rubber checks, and strategic retirements from the 102d house», American Journal of Political Science, 38 (1): 75-99.
  • Hays, S. P. 1967. «Political parties and the community-society continuum», en William Nisbet Chambers y Walter Dean Burnham, eds., The American party systems: stages of development. Nueva York: Oxford University Press.
  • Heath, A., I. McLean, y B. Taylor. 1997. «How much is at stake? Electoral behaviour in second-order elections». Center for Research into Elections and Social Trends (Glasgow), Working Paper, 59.
  • Heidenheimer, A. J. 1970. «Introduction», en A. J. Heidenheimer, ed., Political corruption. Readings in comparative analysis. New Brunswick (N. J.): Transaction.
  • Hibbs, D. A., R. D. Rivers, y N. Vasilatos. 1982. «The dynamics of political support for American presidents among occupational and partisan groups», American Journal of Political Science, 26 (2): 312-332.
  • Jackson, M., y R. Smith. 1996. «Inside moves and outside views: An Australian case study of elite and public perceptions of political corruption», Governance, 9 (1): 23-42.
  • Jacobson, G. 1999. «Impeachment politics in the 1998 congressional elections», Political Science Quarterly, 114(1): 31-51.
  • Jacobson, G., y M. Dimock. 1994. «Checking out: The effects of bank overdrafts on the 1992 house elections», American Journal of Political Science, 38 (3): 601-624.
  • Jacobson, G., y S. Kernell. 1983. Strategy and choice in congressional elections. New Haven: Yale University Press.
  • Jiménez, F., y M. Caínzos. 2003. «Political corruption in Spain: Perceptions and problems», en M. Bull y J. Newell, eds., Corruption in contemporary politics. Londres: Palgrave Press.
  • Johnston, M. 1986. «Right and wrong in American politics: popular conceptions of corruption», Polity, 18 (3): 367-391.
  • Kiewiet, D. R., y L. Zeng. 1993. «An analysis of congressional career decisions, 1947-1986», American Political Science Review, 87 (4): 928-941.
  • Klessner, J. L. 1998. «An electoral route to democracy? Mexico’s transition in comparative perspective», Comparative Politics, 30 (4): 477-497.
  • Krosnick, J. A., y D. R. Kinder. 1990. «Altering the foundations of support for the president through priming», American Political Science Review, 84 (2): 497-512.
  • Ladd, E. C. 1998. «Nixon and Watergate revisited», The Public Perspective, abril-mayo.
  • Lafay, J.-D., y M. Servais. 2000. «The influence of political scandals on popularity and votes», en M. S. Lewis-Beck, ed., How France votes. Nueva York: Chatham House.
  • Lupia, A., y M. D. McCubbins. 1998. The democratic dilemma. Can citizens learn what they need to know? Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • McAllister, I. 2000. «Keeping them honest: public and elite perceptions of ethical conduct among Australian legislators», Political Studies, 48: 22-37.
  • McCann, J. A., y J. I. Domínguez. 1998. «Mexicans react to electoral fraud and political corruption: an assessment of public opinion and voting behaviour», Electoral Studies, 17 (4): 483-503.
  • McCurley, C., y J. J. Mondak. 1995. «Inspected by # 1184063113: the influence of incumbents’ competence and integrity in US house elections», American Journal of Political Science, 39 (4): 864-885.
  • McGraw, K. 1991. «Managing blame: an experimental test of the effects of political accounts», American Political Science Review, 85 (4): 1133-1157.
  • McKuen, M. 1983. «Political drama, economic conditions, and the dynamics of presidential popularity», American Journal of Political Science, 27: 165-192.
  • McLeod, J. M., J. D. Brown, y L. B. Becker. 1977. «Watergate and the 1974 congressional elections», Public Opinion Quarterly, 41: 181-195.
  • Miller, A. H. 1999. «Sex, politics and public opinion: what political science really learned from the Clinton-Lewinsky scandal», PS: Political Science and Politics, XXXII (4): 721-729.
  • Miller, A. H., Ma. P. Wattenberg, y O. Malanchuk. 1986. «Schematic assessments of presidential candidates», American Political Science Review, 80: 521-540.
  • Myerson, R. B. 1993. «Effectiveness of electoral systems for reducing government corruption: a game-theoretic analysis», Games and Economic Behaviour, 5: 118-132.
  • Newman, B. 2002. «Bill Clinton’s approval ratings: the more things change, the more they stay the same», Political Research Quarterly, 55 (4): 781-804.
  • Pérez Díaz, V. 1996. España puesta a prueba. Madrid: Alianza.
  • Peters, J. G., y S. Welch. 1978. «Political corruption in America: a search for definitions and a theory», American Political Science Review, 72: 974-984.
  • Peters, J. G. 1980. «The effects of charges of corruption on voting behaviour in congressional elections», American Political Science Review, 74 (3): 697-708.
  • Pierce, P. A. 1994. «Political sophistication and the use of candidate traits in candidate evaluation», Political Psychology, 14: 21-35.
  • Pitkin, H. F. 1967. The concept of representation. Berkeley: The University of California Press.
  • Popkin, S. 1991. The reasoning voter. communication and persuasion in presidential campaigns. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. Popkin, S. 1993. «Information shortcuts and the reasoning voter», en Bernard Grofman, ed., Information, participation and choice. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
  • Reed, S. R. 1999. «Punishing corruption: the response of the japanese electorate to scandals», en Oder Feldman, ed., Political Psychology in Japan. Commack, N. Y.: Nova Science Publishers.
  • Renshon, S. 2002. «The polls: the public’s response to the Clinton scandals, part 2: diverse explanations, clearer consequences», Presidential Studies Quarterly, 32: 412-427.
  • Richardson, B. 1997. Japanese democracy: power, coordination and performance. New Haven: Yale University Press.
  • Rundquist, B. S., G. S. Strom, y J. G. Peters. 1977. «Corrupt politicians and their electoral support: some experimental observations», American Political Science Review, 71: 954-963.
  • Schwarz, N., y H. Bless. 1992. «Scandals and the public’s trust in politicians: assimilation and contrast effects», Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 18 (5): 574-579.
  • Shea, D. M. 1999. «All scandal politics is local. Ethical lapses, the media and congressional elections», Harvard International Journal of Press and Politics, 4 (2): 45-62.
  • Sonner, M. W., y C. Wilcox. 1999. «Forgiving and forgetting: public support for Bill Clinton during the Lewinsky scandal», PS: Political Science and Politics, XXXII (3): 554-557.
  • Stewart III, C. 1994. «Let’s go fly a kite: correlates of involvement in the House Bank scandal», Legislative Studies Quarterly, 19 (4): 521-535.
  • Stoker, L. 1993. «Judging presidential character: the demise of Gary Hart», Political Behaviour, 15 (2): 193-223.
  • Uslaner, E. M., y M. M. Conway. 1985. «The responsible congressional electorate: Watergate, the economy and vote choice in 1974», American Political Science Review, 79: 788-803.
  • Van der Eijk, C., y M. Franklin. 1996. Choosing Europe? The European electorate and national politics in the face of union. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press.
  • Welch, S., y J. R. Hibbing. 1997. «The effects of charges of corruption on voting behaviour in congressional elections, 1982-1990». The Journal of Politics, 59 (1): 226-239.
  • Wert, J. I. 1996. «Las elecciones legislativas del 3-M. Paisaje después de la batalla», Claves, 61: 36-44.
  • Wilson, J. Q., y E. C. Banfield. 1964. «Public-regardingness as a value premise in voting behaviour», American Political Science Review, 58: 876-887.
  • Wilson, J. Q., y E. C. Banfield. 1971. «Political ethos revisited», American Political Science Review, 65: 1048-1062.
  • Zaller, J. R. 1998. «Monica Lewinsky’s contribution to political science», PS: Political Science and Politics, 31 (2): 182-189.
Fuente de los datos: Dialnet