{"title":"《投票行为的计算机模拟》,保罗·谢弗著,牛津大学出版社,1972年","authors":"Gerald B. Finch","doi":"10.1145/1103263.1103265","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Investigators should submit papers describing actual experiences with computer use in a specific course. Papers must report concrete results only, and be submitted in final form. Papers which will be presented are to be refereed and selected by a panel drawn from each field. The conference will be held on the campuses of the Claremont Colleges. Deadline date for the submission of papers is January 15, 1973. This work is difficult to assess due to the misleading prominent reference to computer simulation in its title. The reader anticipating a sophisticated application of computer simulation is unlikely to find much of interest in Shaffer's anai~rsis. However, Shaffer's treatment of different models of voting behavior should prove useful to those familiar with the literature on voting behavior. Shaffer discusses four models of voting. His review of the simulative efforts of Pool, Abelson, Popkin and McPhee, Ferguson, and Smith is good. Both the theory and the methodology of these two pioneering computer simulations are reviewed intelligently and extensively. The two other models selected by Shaffer are the rational-man model of Anthony Downs (An Economic Theory of Democracy) and the components model of an~ysts affiiiated with t~ University of Michigan's Survey Rsearch Center (Stokes, Campbell, and Miller). Neither of the two latter models are computer simulations. Although he discusses four theories of voting, Shaffer applies only two to electrical phenomena. The bulk of his work consists of the empirical application of the Downsian and SRC models. Curiously, after discussing in some detail the simulations of Pool, et al. and McPee, et al., Shaffer virtually ignores them in the last four of the book's seven chapters. The models of Downs and the SRC are both based at the individual psychological level. In each the citizen decides whether to vote and for whom to vote. (Although the former decision is not considered by the original SRC model, Shaffer modifies it to account for abstention.) The emphasis of Downs is on the rational cost-benefit calculus of the citizen. The citizen makes a number of calculations (e.g., information costs, expected utility flows from candidates, etc.) which govern his electoral decision.","PeriodicalId":129356,"journal":{"name":"ACM Sigsoc Bulletin","volume":"110 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1972-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Review of \\\"Computer Simulations of Voting Behavior, by Paul R. Shaffer\\\", Oxford University Press, 1972\",\"authors\":\"Gerald B. Finch\",\"doi\":\"10.1145/1103263.1103265\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Investigators should submit papers describing actual experiences with computer use in a specific course. Papers must report concrete results only, and be submitted in final form. Papers which will be presented are to be refereed and selected by a panel drawn from each field. The conference will be held on the campuses of the Claremont Colleges. Deadline date for the submission of papers is January 15, 1973. This work is difficult to assess due to the misleading prominent reference to computer simulation in its title. The reader anticipating a sophisticated application of computer simulation is unlikely to find much of interest in Shaffer's anai~rsis. However, Shaffer's treatment of different models of voting behavior should prove useful to those familiar with the literature on voting behavior. Shaffer discusses four models of voting. His review of the simulative efforts of Pool, Abelson, Popkin and McPhee, Ferguson, and Smith is good. Both the theory and the methodology of these two pioneering computer simulations are reviewed intelligently and extensively. The two other models selected by Shaffer are the rational-man model of Anthony Downs (An Economic Theory of Democracy) and the components model of an~ysts affiiiated with t~ University of Michigan's Survey Rsearch Center (Stokes, Campbell, and Miller). Neither of the two latter models are computer simulations. Although he discusses four theories of voting, Shaffer applies only two to electrical phenomena. The bulk of his work consists of the empirical application of the Downsian and SRC models. Curiously, after discussing in some detail the simulations of Pool, et al. and McPee, et al., Shaffer virtually ignores them in the last four of the book's seven chapters. The models of Downs and the SRC are both based at the individual psychological level. In each the citizen decides whether to vote and for whom to vote. (Although the former decision is not considered by the original SRC model, Shaffer modifies it to account for abstention.) The emphasis of Downs is on the rational cost-benefit calculus of the citizen. The citizen makes a number of calculations (e.g., information costs, expected utility flows from candidates, etc.) which govern his electoral decision.\",\"PeriodicalId\":129356,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ACM Sigsoc Bulletin\",\"volume\":\"110 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1972-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ACM Sigsoc Bulletin\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1145/1103263.1103265\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACM Sigsoc Bulletin","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/1103263.1103265","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
研究者应提交论文,描述在特定课程中使用计算机的实际经验。论文必须只报告具体的结果,并以最终形式提交。将提交的论文将由来自每个领域的小组进行评审和选择。会议将在克莱蒙特学院的校园里举行。论文提交截止日期为1973年1月15日。这项工作是难以评估的,由于误导突出的参考计算机模拟在其标题。期待计算机模拟的复杂应用的读者不太可能对谢弗的分析感兴趣。然而,Shaffer对不同投票行为模型的处理应该对那些熟悉投票行为文献的人有用。谢弗讨论了四种投票模式。他对普尔、阿贝尔森、波普金、麦克菲、弗格森和史密斯的模拟努力的回顾很好。这两个开创性的计算机模拟的理论和方法进行了智能和广泛的审查。谢弗选择的另外两个模型是安东尼·唐斯(《民主的经济理论》)的理性人模型和密歇根大学调查研究中心(Stokes, Campbell, and Miller)下属的一个研究小组的成分模型。后两种模型都不是计算机模拟的。尽管谢弗讨论了四种投票理论,但他只将两种理论应用于电现象。他的大部分工作包括对唐斯模型和SRC模型的实证应用。奇怪的是,在详细讨论了Pool等人和McPee等人的模拟之后,Shaffer实际上在书的七章的最后四章中忽略了它们。Downs和SRC的模型都是基于个体心理层面的。在每个选举中,公民决定是否投票和投票给谁。(尽管最初的SRC模型没有考虑到前一种决定,但Shaffer对其进行了修改,以考虑弃权。)唐斯的重点是公民的理性成本-收益计算。公民需要进行一系列计算(例如,信息成本、候选人的预期效用流等),这些计算影响着他的选举决策。
Review of "Computer Simulations of Voting Behavior, by Paul R. Shaffer", Oxford University Press, 1972
Investigators should submit papers describing actual experiences with computer use in a specific course. Papers must report concrete results only, and be submitted in final form. Papers which will be presented are to be refereed and selected by a panel drawn from each field. The conference will be held on the campuses of the Claremont Colleges. Deadline date for the submission of papers is January 15, 1973. This work is difficult to assess due to the misleading prominent reference to computer simulation in its title. The reader anticipating a sophisticated application of computer simulation is unlikely to find much of interest in Shaffer's anai~rsis. However, Shaffer's treatment of different models of voting behavior should prove useful to those familiar with the literature on voting behavior. Shaffer discusses four models of voting. His review of the simulative efforts of Pool, Abelson, Popkin and McPhee, Ferguson, and Smith is good. Both the theory and the methodology of these two pioneering computer simulations are reviewed intelligently and extensively. The two other models selected by Shaffer are the rational-man model of Anthony Downs (An Economic Theory of Democracy) and the components model of an~ysts affiiiated with t~ University of Michigan's Survey Rsearch Center (Stokes, Campbell, and Miller). Neither of the two latter models are computer simulations. Although he discusses four theories of voting, Shaffer applies only two to electrical phenomena. The bulk of his work consists of the empirical application of the Downsian and SRC models. Curiously, after discussing in some detail the simulations of Pool, et al. and McPee, et al., Shaffer virtually ignores them in the last four of the book's seven chapters. The models of Downs and the SRC are both based at the individual psychological level. In each the citizen decides whether to vote and for whom to vote. (Although the former decision is not considered by the original SRC model, Shaffer modifies it to account for abstention.) The emphasis of Downs is on the rational cost-benefit calculus of the citizen. The citizen makes a number of calculations (e.g., information costs, expected utility flows from candidates, etc.) which govern his electoral decision.