1975
DOI: 10.1080/00323267508401491
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Party voting contagion in city regions

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

1976
1976
1987
1987

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 7 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 22 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…One such alternative takes the explanation back to box 111, suggesting that because of social mobility a person's present political opinions may reflect an earlier process of socialisation not consonant with his current status. Another holds that the apparent confirmation of the neighbourhood effect hypothesis may reflect differential turnout of voters only (Taylor, 1973), but evidence of the effect has been found in Australia, where voting is compulsory (Herbert, 1975).…”
Section: Enuironrnental Influencesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…One such alternative takes the explanation back to box 111, suggesting that because of social mobility a person's present political opinions may reflect an earlier process of socialisation not consonant with his current status. Another holds that the apparent confirmation of the neighbourhood effect hypothesis may reflect differential turnout of voters only (Taylor, 1973), but evidence of the effect has been found in Australia, where voting is compulsory (Herbert, 1975).…”
Section: Enuironrnental Influencesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http:// www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions R. J. JOHNSTON GORDON HERBERTS recent paper in this journal provides an interesting example of the influence of spatial variables on voting patterns in large cities. 1 He shows that, in. both Sydney and Melbourne, the socio-economic status of an electorate is a good, but far from complete, predictor of the ALP vote.…”
mentioning
confidence: 97%
“…Herbert 1975;Jones 1981;Scanlan 1977) are usually interpreted as consequences of a particular type of structural effect -the neighbourhood effect. This focuses on a voter's home environment as the influential social milieu, suggesting that the stronger the environmental influence, the greater the likelihood that voters will conform with it.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%