PREDICTING STATE ABORTION LEGISLATION FROM U.S. SENATE VOTES: THE EFFECTS OF APPARENT IDEOLOGICAL SHIRKING

The recent Supreme Court decision in Webster v. Reproductive Health Services giving more discretion to states to regulate abortion has led to speculation concerning which states might move to limit abortions. Medoff (1989) attempts to predict how state legislatures might vote on state-level abortion legislation by examining the 1983 Senate vote on the Hatch/Eagleton Amendment. We expand upon Medoff's analysis by incor- porating recent developments in agency theory as it applies to the political agents (i.e., Senators) in the empirical model. The results demonstrate that accounting for Senatorial "shirking" and state ideology substantially im- proves the predictive ability of the model for the Senate abortion vote. The predicted votes of the state's Senators, after eliminating the effects of apparent Senatorial shirking, are used to infer the likelihood of state-level legislation substantially restricting abortion. We compare these results to a base model that ignores the issue of shirking and find increased predict- ability and several differing results.     

Efficient use of reference group cues in a single dimension

If there are groups whose endorsements voters can use as positive (or negative) cues, we demonstrate that voters do not need to know anything directly about candidate positions to be able to identify the candidate whose issue positions and performance is likely to be closest to the voter's own preferences. In one dimension we show that, given certain simplifying assumptions, voters are best off adopting the choice recommended by the single reference group to which they are closest. We also show that even a decision by reference groups not to endorse any candidate may be informative to voters.     

Cycle avoiding trajectories,strategic agendas,and the duality of memory and foresight: An informal exposition

This paper considers the notion of cycle avoiding trajectories in majority voting tournaments and shows that they underlie and guide several apparently disparate voting processes. The set of alternatives that are maximal with respect to such trajectories constitutes a new solution set of considerable significance. It may be dubbed the Banks set, in recognition of the important paper by Banks (1985) that first made use of this set. The purpose of this paper is to informally demonstrate that the Banks set is a solution set of broad relevance for understanding group decision making in both cooperative and non-cooperative settings and under both sincere and sophisticated voting. In addition, we show how sincere and sophisticated voting processes can be viewed as mirror images of one another — embodying respectively, “dmemory” and “foresight.” We also show how to develop the idea of a “sophisticated agenda,” one in which the choice of what alternatives to propose is itself a matter of strategic calculation.     

Parental discord vs family structure: effects of divorce on the self-esteem of daughters

This study investigated the effects of family structure (parents together or not) and parental discord (ratings of the happiness of the marriage of biological parents) on the self-esteem of 199 female undergraduates. Family structure and happiness ratings were substantially related, with those separated rated as less happy. Self-esteem was significantly related to parental happiness, even with family structure controlled, but not to family structure with parental happiness controlled. With the sample divided into three groups (happy-together, unhappy-together, and separated) ANOVA showed a significant effect for group, with the unhappy-together group showing significantly lower self-esteem than the happy-together group, and the separated group intermediate. Parental discord thus appears to lower the selfesteem of daughters, whereas separation of parents does not. These findings support Heatherington's idea that children may be better off in a stable family where parents are divorced than in an intact family with much parental discord.Thanks are expressed to Susan Stevenson Cowles for her contributions to all stages of the study, and to Judith Fidati, Anita Katz, and Susanne Long for their assistance in the scoring and statistical analyses. The author is also grateful to Andrew Cherlin, Edmund Henderson, and Ruth C. Wylie for their helpful suggestions.Barbara H. Long is Professor Emeritus at Goucher College, where she has taught for 20 years. She is a social psychologist, having received her Ph.D. from the University of Delaware and has, at present, research interests in the attitudes of young women towards marriage and career.