This paper uses data from the 2004 pre-election survey of the American National Election Study to test empirically different ways of incorporating a valence parameter into a Downsian utility function. We call particular attention to the problem of interpersonal incomparability of responses to the liberal-conservative scale, and use Aldrich–McKelvey’s pathbreaking method to obtain accurate distances between respondents and candidates, the key regressors. We find that the utility function the most supported by the empirical evidence, the intensity valence utility function, is the one which permits to make the better predictions for the 2004 presidential election. We also consider counterfactual analyses wherein we test if Bush, the candidate with the highest intensity valence, has dominant strategies which would have insured him to obtain a majority of the popular vote. According to the theory, it is known that the candidate with the highest intensity valence does not have such dominant strategies if the distribution of voters in the policy space is too heterogenous. Nevertheless, we show that the distribution of voters in 2004 is sufficiently homogenous for Bush to have dominant strategies.

本文使用来自2004年美国全国大选研究的大选前调查的数据，以经验方式测试将化合价参数纳入Downsian效用函数的方法。我们特别注意对自由主义保守主义尺度的人际不可比性问题，并使用Aldrich–McKelvey的开创性方法来获取受访者与主要回归者之间的准确距离。我们发现经验证据最支持的效用函数是强度价效用函数，它可以为2004年总统大选做出更好的预测。我们还考虑了反事实分析，其中我们会测试强度最高的候选者布什 他的主导策略可以确保他获得多数选票。根据该理论，众所周知，如果政策空间中选民的分布过于分散，则具有最高强度价的候选人就不会具有这种主导策略。但是，我们表明，2004年选民的分配情况足以使布什拥有占主导地位的战略。