Polls are the sampling measurement of information representing the social will. The purpose of using poll data is to understand the people’s behaviors
poll center were open、complete、and neutral, even more, TVBS surveyed according to incident happening, that made the data itself more proper to analyze the response after events happening.
In this thesis, researcher uses TVBS Poll Center data surveyed by CATI (Computer Assisted Telephone Interview). Period of poll data concerned is from 8/15/1999 to 3/6/2000. Sources were obtained from sampling the last four characters of telephone number by RDD (random-digit-dialing). The biggest sampling size and the smallest one is 2092 and 938. Sampling error for n is
±3% at the 95% confidence interval. There were about average 23.17%
undecided. From August 15, 1999 to March 18, 2000,,the average support rates(%) of Chen、Lien, and Soong are 24.8%、20.8% and 29.9% individually.
Before the comparison between poll data before election and election outcomes, considering there were undecided part and whose who didn’t want to claim their stands, the distribution of these unknown part will be assumed the same as the known part. However, concerning the support rates of Hsu and Li were far behind the first three candidates, both poll and election outcome will be focused on the first tree candidates to recount the support rates. The sum of three candidates' support rate in poll and election outcome was 97.4% and 99.24%.
Th e Av erag e Su p p o rt rates o f
2 0 0 0 Presid en tial Electio n su rv ey ed b y TVBS Lien
21%
Chen Soong 25%
30%
Others 1%
Undecided 23%
Figure 10 The average support rates of 2000 presidential election surveyed by TVBS
The 2000 ROC Presidential Election Outcomes Lien(KMT)
23.10%
Hsu(Ind.) 0.63% Li Ao(New) 0.13%
Chen(DPP)
Figure 11 The 2000 ROC presidential election outcomes Table2 The 2000 ROC presidential election outcomes Presidential
votes Percentage Chen
Chau-hsiung Independent 4,664,972 36.84%
Lien Chan Vincent Siew
Chu Independent 79,429 0.63%
Li Ao Elmer Fung New Party 16,782 0.13%
Votes cast 12,786,671 Valid votes 12,664,393 Voter
turnout 82.69% Invalid votes 122,278
Source is ROC Central Election Commission.
The assumptions of dealing with this data are (a) there’s no bias in
sampling method, (b) the distribution pattern of the undeclared was the same as the declared.
The purpose of this thesis is to demonstrate catastrophe model can be applied to voting behavior and after-event analysis, poll data and election outcome will be presented as the voters’ behavior state. By analyzing behavior state (will be defined as Z) and Social Norm (will be defined as Y), the inner evaluation of voters can be obtained.
Originally to demonstrate the catastrophe model, having two control variables can infer to behavior state, but in this thesis, there are only behavior state data, therefore, how to realize the interaction between two control
variables will be demonstrated.
5. Catastrophe Application 5.1 James Soong’s financial affair
Before Soong was questioned about his son’s financial affair, he had been considered as a clean politician and remained higher support rate than the second place Chen. Good time didn’t last long. This leading trend was
interrupted by the query came from the KMT Legislator Yang, Chi-shiung. On December 9, 1999, Chi-hsiung Yang held a press conference and revealed Soong's son, Soong Chen-yuan, who just had graduated from college and finished military obligation, deposited more than NT$100 million (about US$3.1 million) in his bank account in 1992. The younger Soong was just 24-years old and was jobless when he received the securities. The affair has had an
immediate impact on James Soong's standings in opinion polls.
The poll of presendential election during
15%
KMT expelled James Soong Start to sign Survey on party image KMT and DPP planned to form union government Soong stumbled over son＇s financial affairs Soong held the first press conference Soong held the second press conference KMT John Chang love affair broke Soong held the third press conference Chou Hsieh, Chi-ta published the outcome of check account KMT estimated assets to be entrusted Soong and Chen promoted in Taipei and Kaoshiung Two months before the election
11/17 11/21 11/28 12/5 12/12 12/15 12/19 12/26 12/29 1/2 1/5 1/10 1/17
Date and Even
t
Support rate
Lien Chen Soong
Figure 13 The polls from 11/17/1999 to 1/17/2000
Yang thought the money flows were related to that year's legislative elections and James Soong's pivotal role in the KMT election campaign.
Soong was at that serving at secretary-general of the ruling party. Soong denied at first, and involved many people, Teng-hui Lee、the Chiang family、
Hsu Hsin-liang, into this affair. People thought he might expose a bigger scandal involving the KMT. Soong held three press conferences, but he couldn’t explain clearly. Even more, he was vacillating in his explanation that disappointed his supporter. Soong stumbled over son’s financial affair.
Based on the poll conducted by TVBS Poll Center, the support rate of Soong dropped down 7 percentage point from 34% to 27% only during three days after the financial affair broke, According to Presidential Election Update website, in a poll of 893 people conducted Friday by the United Daily News, Soong's support rating dropped to 24 percent, down 8 percentage points compared to a previous poll on November 30. Meanwhile, Chen climbed to 23 percent from 19 percent, and Lien increased his rating by one point to stand at 23 percent. Another poll of 1,069 people conducted by Gallip and
commissioned by SET TV showed that Soong's ratings had dropped from 36 percent to 28 percent.
This impact on Soong’s support rate was so huge that erodes quarter of his original support rate. Because Soong rose upon the image of honest and upright that makes difference from KMT’s long-term “black-gold” burden. This affair broken made no difference and disappointed Soong’s supporters.
KMT kept up firing on Soong's unfaithfulness and perfidy until they used the wrong strategy- property entrusted. This argument of property entrusted shifted the focus off the thorny problem that eased the pain of Soong camp on January 2nd. The poll data showed the supporters of Soong ran to Chen, after two weeks there are few supporters of Soong indlined to Lien. The Soong financial affair accidentally caused a new equilibrium of three forces.
Table 3 Support rates of candidates
Support Rates of candidates (%)
12/05 KMT and DPP planned to form union government
21 23 34 12/09 Soong’s financial affair broke
12/12 Soong stumbled over son’s financial affairs 18 31 27 12/15 Soong held the first press conference 23 26 25 12/19 Soong held the second press conference 23 27 27 12/26 KMT John Chang love affair broke 20 29 26 12/29 Soong held the third press conference 22 25 26
1/02 Chou Hsieh, Chi-ta published the outcome of check account
21 30 27 1/05 KMT estimated assets to be entrusted 23 24 25 1/10 Soong and Chen promoted in Taipei and
Kaoshiung
22 26 29
1/17 Two months before the election 21 27 26
Catastrophe analysis
This dynamic effect of financial affair that caused the support rate
changing substantially can be analyzed by catastrophe voting behavior model.
At first, Soong had good reputation that made his support rate higher than others. Not only those who liked Soong would vote him, but also those who disliked Soong might vote. Using catastrophe voting behavior model, we can denote the social evaluation as positive at Y1. Assume that under the
condition of the intensity of social norm and inner evaluation are obtained, and the Catastrophe Line L is therefore be found, the catastrophe model can
model the Thus, even those who inner evaluate Soong as negative at point X1, under the Catastrophe Line L assumption, they would behave as positive
action to approve for Soong. Their behavior Z1 is the interaction of voter’s
inner evaluation and social norm of Soong that falls at the region of approval.
This remained a long time. But after KMT legislator revealed the financial affair of Soong’s son, the social evaluation changed from positive to negative immediately which is denoted as the shift from the point Y1 to Y2. At the
negative social norm Y2, even those who inner evaluate Soong as positive like X2 would changed his original preference to behave disapproval. The behavior Z2 which was the interaction between positive inner evaluation X2 and
negative social norm Y2 fell on against zone.
From top looked down to X axis, the change of social norm can be
assumed from positive to negative, under the Catastrophe Line L assumption, support rates can be observed down from 34% to 27%. Those who judged Soong not well but attracted by his good reputation ran.
27%
Y (Social norm on Soong)
X (Inner evaluation
Figure 14 The catastrophe voting model of Soong’s financial affair In 3D model, those who originally inner-evaluate positively not so strong change their behavior. Phase goes straight from upper phase (for zone) to lower phase (against zone). This is the quantity changes of social norm leads
Figure 15 The three-dimension catastrophe voting model of Soong case 5.2 Strategy Voting
Originally, as time went by to ten days before election, this was the
neck-and-neck presidential election. If there is any chance for strategic voting to occur and to have an effect upon the race, the following condition would have to hold. One candidate would have to be clearly behind in the race while the other two are in fierce competition. Based on the poll data ten days before the election, the support rates of the first-runner, Lien、Chen and Soong, were individually 33.33%、34.67%、32.00%. With the race as close as it was, there was little direction for voters to decide whose supporters should defect. In there was little reason to expect strategic voting. After the ten-day period (3/8-3/17) while poll couldn't be published, which is regulated by Presidential and Vice Presidential Election and Recall Law passed in 1995, the election outcome turned the tables. What happened during the ten blackout period became the key point to explain the marked shift in voter's preference.
Dr. Yuan-Tseh Lee gave in his resignation as the president of the Academia Sinica on March 3, 5 days before the election. Not only his resignation from Academia Sinica but also his agreement to be advisor to Chen convulsed the society. From March 10, Dr. Lee took his stands on Chen, the neutral voters and intellectuals were starting to lean on DPP. Till the night before election. March 17, the momentum of Chen was higher than ever by Dr.
Lee’s video support broadcasting.
After a week before the election, Chen gained a tremendous momentum after some of Lee Teng-hui's close friends claimed that Chen was the true follower of Lee Teng-Hui and after the president of the Academia Sinica, Nobel laureate Dr. Lee Yuan-Zhe, openly supported Chen. It looked as if Chen
attracted more and more supports from central voters and elites and could be the front-runner. As the result, supporters of Lien and Soong started to wonder whether they should vote strategically. This competition became pan-blue against pan-green during the blackout period. The KMT camp claimed that Lien was still ahead in all the major polls, suggesting that Soong’s supporters should vote strategically for Lien. The Soong camp, on the other hand, argued that Lien was running a distant third and that his supporters should vote
strategically. Besides, PRC Premier Zhu Rongji issued hard line comments on Taiwan's presidential election like “Nothing doing without a deadline!” “Nothing doing without force!“ The threat of mainland China aroused the antipathetic mind of Taiwan people.
Because the three front-runners gained over 97.4% support rates, to simplify the analysis, the size of total will be narrow down on the three candidate-Lien, Soong, and Chen. The support rate changes during the ten day blackout can be analyzed by figure 16 and table 4. Originally, 10 days
the pan-green part of Lien’s supporters changed to support Chen. The pan-blue part of Lien didn’t want to see the pan-green winner, and they
changed to Soong camp. This strategic voting behavior makes Lien loss about 10% support rates while 5% ran to Chen and 5% to Soong.
Figure 16 Catastrophe happened during ten days before election Chen z Three candidates
were probably of equal strength.
3/8～3/17 Blackout period z Chen promoted、Zhu Rongji
warned.
z The pan-blue part of the Lien supporters ran to Soong camp while the pan-green part ran to the Chen camp.
3/18 Election z Soong and Chen
competed the crown.
z Lien was far behind Soong and Chen z
+5% +5%
Table 4 The comparison between polls and election outcomes
3/6 3/18 Difference
Chen 35 40 +5
Soong 32 37 +5
Lien 33 23 -10
Many people thought Taipei city mayor Ma should take part of the responsibility. Taipei city mayor Ma Ying-jeoh, a KMT political star who had spread information before the election indicating the most poll results still showed KMT candidate Lien as the front runner. This movement can explain why pan-blue lost this battle to pan-green. Many KMT supporters believed they were misled by Mayor Ma to stick with Lien when he actually had the least chance of winning. The claim of Mayor Ma applied the brakes to this effect of strategic voting.
There are tow conditions that Chen may not win from strategic voting: one is the strategic voting makes more and more people to Soong, then Soong would win; or combining other strategies with Mayor Ma’s statement, the outcome would not only retain original supporters of Lien but also attract more supporters from other camps that make Lien winner.
Based on data of March 6, we can find that ten percent loss of Lien (23%-33%) was equal to 5 percent gain of Chen(40%-35%) plus
Shoong(37%-32%). Also take January 29 as a basis, we can find the
coincidence of on the basis of March6. Nine percent loss of Lien (23%-32%) was equal to 8 percent gain of Chen (40%-32%) plus 1percent gain of
Shoong(37%-36%). Strategy voting happens.
Catastrophe analysis
Vertical axis Y will represents social evaluation on Lien while horizontal X as self inner evaluation on Lien. Both X and Y are control variable of voting behavior. If personal inner evaluation is positive, then the behavioral
acceptation zone will show as graph. Ten days before election, the social norm Y can be assumed as positive at Z1，After ten blackout days, social norm on Lien weakened from Y1 to Y2 for the reason of Chen’s promotion and there comes the sayings of “abandon Lien save Soong” or “abandon Lien, save Chen”. Under the assumption of change from Y1 to Y2, according to
Catastrophe Line L, the influence of X is X1-X2, and the influence made the support rate ran off 10%.
Figure 17 The catastrophe voting model of Lien’s financial affair Y (Social norm on Lien)
X (Inner evaluation on Lien)
_
_ X1 +
Y2
Y1 2( 2, )2
Z X Y
1( 1, )1
Z X Y
Catastrophe Line L
+ For
X2
1 2
Y Y Y Δ = − Against
33%
5% to Soong 23%
5% to Chen
Strategy voting happens. Because those who like lager the most, they don’t want to spoil their ballots. In this case, Soong and Chen remained long –term higher level of support rate. If the difference |Soong-Chen| is very close, strategy voting will most likely happen. Then strategy voting will weaken the strength of herding. That can explain why Lien lost 10 percent so much.
Look down to X axis, it shortens from 33% to 23%. People prevent invalid ballot from strategy voting. Herding leads to cohesion of group dynamics were weaken. Coincidently, the ten percentage loss was equal to percentage gain of Chen and Shoong.
Figure 18. The three-dimension catastrophe voting model of Lien case In three-dimensions, we can find out that social norm became weaker.
Who stand at upper state (for zone) drops to lower state (against zone). Thus a sudden jump happens.
6. Conclusion and Recommendation
This thesis provides a new conceptual model to explain voting behavior.
This is an application of catastrophe theory to analyze voting behavior.
Original cusp catastrophe theory has cusp projection. In this thesis, researcher simplifies cusp projection to line projection. The difference between cusp
projection and line projection is hysteresis. Researcher discusses sudden jump rather than hysteresis in voting behavior.
In this case, state variable has bimodality between vote and don’t vote zone; also we can see sudden jump in Soong’ scandal broke. It turns the phase from acceptation zone expansion to erosion. To go a step further, we use catastrophe approach to realize how strategic voting influences ballot.
Strategic voting behavior means that when there are three or more candidates competing in one certain election, voters, under rational consideration, think that their most favorite candidate has no chance of
winning at all, and recognize that their voting for this candidate will cause their least favorite candidate to win; therefore, voters can only choose to vote for their second favorite candidate to avoid from their most undesirable outcome.
In the 2000 presidential election, the three major contenders of Lien Chan, Chen Shui-bian, and James Soong were equally competitive, which created a context of strategic voting. This study therefore used “strategic voting” as a main theme to investigate the voters’ voting behavior in the 2000 presidential election. It was found that lots of KMT’s votes shifted to the campaigns of either Chen Shui-bian and James Soong, which more or less demonstrated voters’ low stability for partisan voting in this election, and to some degree was a result of voters’ strategic voting behavior. It revealed that Lien Chan, who was considered the most competent, was always voters’ second best choice before the election. That is, voters felt neutral towards Lien Chan, who was neither voters’ most favorite candidate nor the least desired one, and
additionally Lien Chan had long been the weakest in the poll, which made him the most likely to be abandoned. The result of the election also showed that among the voters who adopted the strategy of “abandoning someone to save another”, fewest chose to “save Lien Chan.” Hence, voters did have “strategic voting behavior” in the 2000 presidential election, and Lien Chan obviously claimed the highest percentage of voters’ abandoned candidate.
After analysis mentioned above, we can conclude that while inner evaluation is of the same attribute of social norm, the state remain stable. If social norm and Inner evaluation are of different attributes, state goes to
unstable. Then we should concern about intensity of social norm. If intensity of social norm is strong enough, the state will change to another state.
Figure 19 The interaction between inner evaluation and social norm
For further studies, using quantitative data could be a way to verify catastrophe. So far, there is no universal tool. The determinist model and probabilistic model is still in argument. However, how to measure the variables of catastrophe voting model is proposed in this thesis for those who are
interested in voting behavior changes.
References English
Alexander, R., Hervert, G., Deshon, R., and Hanges, P. 1992, “An examination of least-squares regression modeling of catastrophe theory,” Psychological Bulletin, 111, pp.366-379.
Anderson, P.,1999, “Perspective: complexity theory and organization science,”
Organization Science, 10 (3), pp.216-232.
Caldart, A. A. and Joan E. R., 2004, “Corporate strategy revisited：a view from complexity theory,” European Management Review, 1, pp. 96-104.
Cottam, Martha L., Preston Thomas, 2004, Introduction to political psychology, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, New Jersey,
Duverger, Maurice, 1964, Political Parties，3rd ed, London:Methum., pp.206-255
Forsyth, D. R., 1999, Group Dynamics, Wadsworth Publishing Company, pp.622,
Gilmore, Robert, 1981, Catastrophe Theory for Scientists and Engineers, NY: Wiley,
Gleick, James, 1987, Chaos: Making of a New Science, New York: Penguin
Hibbert, Brynn and Ian F. Wilkinson,1994, “Chaos Theory and the Dynamics of Marketing Systems,” Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 22, pp.218-233.
Holbrook, M. B., 2003, “Adventures in complexity: an essay on dynamic open
Holbrook, M. B., 2003, “Adventures in complexity: an essay on dynamic open