Table of Contents Author Guidelines Submit a Manuscript
Complexity
Volume 2017, Article ID 7354642, 15 pages
https://doi.org/10.1155/2017/7354642
Research Article

Empirical Analysis and Agent-Based Modeling of the Lithuanian Parliamentary Elections

Institute of Theoretical Physics and Astronomy, Vilnius University, Vilnius, Lithuania

Correspondence should be addressed to Aleksejus Kononovicius; tl.uv.iaft@suicivononok.sujeskela

Received 31 August 2017; Accepted 9 November 2017; Published 29 November 2017

Academic Editor: Gilberto C. Gonzalez-Parra

Copyright © 2017 Aleksejus Kononovicius. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Linked References

  1. W. H. Riker and P. C. Ordeshook, “A theory of the calculus of voting,” American Political Science Review, vol. 62, no. 1, pp. 25–42, 1968. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  2. J. A. Ferejohn and M. P. Fiorina, “The paradox of not voting: a decision theoretic analysis,” American Political Science Review, vol. 68, no. 2, pp. 525–536, 1974. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  3. C. J. Uhlaner, “Rational turnout: the neglected role of groups,” American Journal of Political Science, vol. 33, no. 2, pp. 390–422, 1989. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  4. H. Hotelling, “Stability in competition,” The Economic Journal, vol. 39, no. 153, pp. 41–57, 1929. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  5. A. Downs, “An economic theory of political action in a democracy,” Journal of Political Economy, vol. 65, no. 2, pp. 135–150, 1957. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  6. D. Black, The Theory of Committees and Elections, Springer, Dordrecht, the Netherlands, 1958.
  7. C. R. Plott, “A notion of equilibrium and its possibility under majority rule,” American Economic Review, vol. 57, no. 4, pp. 787–806, 1967. View at Google Scholar
  8. R. D. McKelvey, “Intransitivities in multidimensional voting models and some implications for agenda control,” Journal of Economic Theory, vol. 12, no. 3, pp. 472–482, 1976. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at MathSciNet · View at Scopus
  9. S. Ansolabehere and J. M. Snyder Jr., “Valence politics and equilibrium in spatial election models,” Public Choice, vol. 103, no. 3/4, pp. 327–336, 2000. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  10. W. B. Arthur, “Inductive reasoning and bounded rationality,” American Economic Review, vol. 84, pp. 406–411, 1994. View at Google Scholar
  11. G. Akerlof and J. Shiller, Animal Spirits: How Human Psychology Drives the Economy, and Why It Matters for Global Capitalism, Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, USA, 2009.
  12. D. Helbing and A. Kirman, “Rethinking economics using complexity theory,” Real-Wold Economic Review, no. 64, pp. 23–51, 2013. View at Google Scholar
  13. A. Nowak, J. Szamrej, and B. Latané, “From private attitude to public opinion: a dynamic theory of social impact,” Psychological Review, vol. 97, no. 3, pp. 362–376, 1990. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  14. R. Axelrod, “The dissemination of culture: a model with local convergence and global polarization,” Journal of Conflict Resolution, vol. 41, no. 2, pp. 203–226, 1997. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  15. R. Hegselmann and U. Krause, “Opinion dynamics and bounded confidence: models, analysis and simulation,” Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 5, no. 3, article 2, 2002. View at Google Scholar
  16. G. Deffuant, “Comparing extremism propagation patterns in continuous opinion models,” Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 9, no. 3, article 8, 2006. View at Google Scholar
  17. P. Sobkowicz, “Discrete model of opinion changes using knowledge and emotions as control variables,” PLoS ONE, vol. 7, no. 9, Article ID e44489, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  18. D. G. Lilleker, “Modelling political cognition,” in Political Communication and Cognition, Political Campaigning and Communication, pp. 198–205, Palgrave Macmillan, London, UK, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  19. P. Sobkowicz, “Quantitative agent based model of opinion dynamics: polish elections of 2015,” PLoS ONE, vol. 11, no. 5, Article ID e0155098, 2016. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  20. P. Duggins, “A psychologically-motivated model of opinion change with applications to american politics,” JASSS, vol. 20, no. 1, article 13, 2017. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  21. P. Ball, “The physical modelling of society: a historical perspective,” Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, vol. 314, no. 1-4, pp. 1–14, 2002. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  22. S. Galam, “Majority rule, hierarchical structures, and democratic totalitarianism: a statistical approach,” Journal of Mathematical Psychology, vol. 30, no. 4, pp. 426–434, 1986. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  23. R. N. Mantegna and H. E. Stanley, Introduction to Econophysics: Correlations and Complexity in Finance, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 2000. View at MathSciNet
  24. B. K. Chakrabarti, A. Chakraborti, and A. Chatterjee, Econophysics and Sociophysics: Trends and Perspectives, John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2006.
  25. C. Castellano, S. Fortunato, and V. Loreto, “Statistical physics of social dynamics,” Reviews of Modern Physics, vol. 81, no. 2, pp. 591–646, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  26. D. Stauffer, “A biased review of sociophysics,” Journal of Statistical Physics, vol. 151, no. 1-2, pp. 9–20, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at MathSciNet · View at Scopus
  27. F. Abergel, H. Aoyama, B. Chakrabarti et al., Econophysics and Sociophysics: Recent Progress and Future Directions, Springer, Berlin, Germany, 2017.
  28. K. Sznajd-Weron, “Sznajd model and its applications,” Acta Physica Polonica B, vol. 36, no. 8, pp. 2537–2547, 2005. View at Google Scholar
  29. S. Galam, “Sociophysics: a review of galam models,” International Journal of Modern Physics C, vol. 19, no. 3, pp. 409–440, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  30. P. Nyczka and K. Sznajd-Weron, “Anticonformity or independence?—insights from statistical physics,” Journal of Statistical Physics, vol. 151, no. 1-2, pp. 174–202, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at MathSciNet
  31. S. Fortunato and C. Castellano, “Scaling and universality in proportional elections,” Physical Review Letters, vol. 99, no. 13, Article ID 138701, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  32. C. A. Andresen, H. F. Hansen, A. Hansen, G. L. Vasconcelos, and J. S. Andrade Jr., “Correlations between political party size and voter memory: a statistical analysis of opinion polls,” International Journal of Modern Physics C, vol. 19, no. 11, pp. 1647–1657, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  33. C. Borghesi and J.-P. Bouchaud, “Spatial correlations in vote statistics: a diffusive field model for decision-making,” The European Physical Journal B, vol. 75, no. 3, pp. 395–404, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  34. M. C. Mantovani, H. V. Ribeiro, M. V. Moro, S. Picoli, and R. S. Mendes, “Scaling laws and universality in the choice of election candidates,” EPL, vol. 96, no. 4, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  35. C. Borghesi, J.-C. Raynal, and J.-P. Bouchaud, “Election turnout statistics in many countries: similarities, differences, and a diffusive field model for decision-making,” PLoS ONE, vol. 7, no. 5, Article ID e36289, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  36. A. Krupavicius, “The lithuanian parliamentary elections of 1996,” Electoral Studies, vol. 16, no. 4, pp. 541–575, 1997. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  37. M. Degutis, “How Lithuanian voters decide: reasons behind the party choice,” Lithuanian Political Science Yearbook, pp. 69–111, 2000. View at Google Scholar
  38. M. Kreuzer and V. Pettai, “Patterns of political instability: affiliation patterns of politicians and voters in post-communist Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania,” Studies in Comparative International Development, vol. 38, no. 2, pp. 76–98, 2003. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  39. M. Jurkynas, “Emerging cleavages in new democracies: the case of Lithuania,” Journal of Baltic Studies, vol. 35, no. 3, pp. 278–296, 2004. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  40. A. Ramonaite, “The development of the Lithuanian party system: from stability to perturbation,” in Post-Communist EU Member States: Parties and Party Systems, pp. 69–88, Routledge, Abingdon, UK, 2006. View at Google Scholar
  41. A. Kirman, “Ants, rationality, and recruitment,” The Quarterly Journal of Economics, vol. 108, no. 1, pp. 137–156, 1993. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  42. S. Alfarano, T. Lux, and F. Wagner, “Estimation of agent-based models: the case of an asymmetric herding model,” Computational Economics, vol. 26, no. 1, pp. 19–49, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  43. S. Alfarano, T. Lux, and F. Wagner, “Time variation of higher moments in a financial market with heterogeneous agents: an analytical approach,” Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, vol. 32, no. 1, pp. 101–136, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at MathSciNet
  44. V. Alfi, M. Cristelli, L. Pietronero, and A. Zaccaria, “Minimal agent based model for financial markets I: origin and self-organization of stylized facts,” The European Physical Journal B, vol. 67, no. 3, pp. 385–397, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  45. A. Kononovicius and V. Gontis, “Agent based reasoning for the non-linear stochastic models of long-range memory,” Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, vol. 391, no. 4, pp. 1309–1314, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  46. S. Alfarano, M. Milaković, and M. Raddant, “A note on institutional hierarchy and volatility in financial markets,” The European Journal of Finance, vol. 19, no. 6, pp. 449–465, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  47. V. Gontis and A. Kononovicius, “Consentaneous agent-based and stochastic model of the financial markets,” PLoS ONE, vol. 9, no. 7, Article ID e102201, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  48. V. Gontis, S. Havlin, A. Kononovicius, B. Podobnik, and H. E. Stanley, “Stochastic model of financial markets reproducing scaling and memory in volatility return intervals,” Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, vol. 462, pp. 1091–1102, 2016. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at MathSciNet · View at Scopus
  49. P. Clifford and A. Sudbury, “A model for spatial conflict,” Biometrika, vol. 60, pp. 581–588, 1973. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at MathSciNet · View at Scopus
  50. T. Liggett, Stochastic Interacting Systems: Contact, Voter, and Exclusion Processes, Springer, Berlin, Germany, 1999.
  51. S. Galam, B. Chopard, and M. Droz, “Killer geometries in competing species dynamics,” Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, vol. 314, no. 1-4, pp. 256–263, 2002. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at MathSciNet · View at Scopus
  52. C. Castellano, D. Vilone, and A. Vespignani, “Incomplete ordering of the voter model on small-world networks,” EPL, vol. 63, no. 1, pp. 153–158, 2003. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  53. J. Fernández-Gracia, K. Suchecki, J. J. Ramasco, M. San Miguel, and V. M. Eguíluz, “Is the voter model a model for voters?” Physical Review Letters, vol. 112, Article ID 158701, 2014. View at Google Scholar
  54. F. Sano, M. Hisakado, and S. Mori, “Mean field voter model of election to the house of representatives in japan,” in Proceedings of the Asia-Pacific Econophysics Conference—Big Data Analysis and Modeling toward Super Smart Society (APEC-SSS '16), Tokyo, Japan, August 2016. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  55. M. Jastramskis, “Forecasting the results of Seimas elections: model of government parties' votes,” Parlamento studijos, vol. 11, 2011. View at Google Scholar
  56. S. Galam, “The invisible hand and the rational agent are behind bubbles and crashes,” Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, vol. 88, pp. 209–217, 2016. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at MathSciNet
  57. T. Fenner, M. Levene, and G. Loizou, “A multiplicative process for generating the rank-order distribution of UK election results,” Quality & Quantity, pp. 1–11, 2017. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  58. G. K. Zipf, Human Behavior and the Principle of Least Effort, Addison-Wesley, Boston, Mass, USA, 1949.
  59. D. Sornette, L. Knopoff, Y. Y. Kagan, and C. Vanneste, “Rank-ordering statistics of extreme events: application to the distribution of large earthquakes,” Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth, vol. 101, no. B6, pp. 13883–13893, 1996. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  60. X. Gabaix, “Zipf's law for cities: an explanation,” The Quarterly Journal of Economics, vol. 114, no. 3, pp. 739–767, 1999. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  61. J. Shao, P. C. Ivanov, B. Uroević, H. E. Stanley, and B. Podobnik, “Zipf rank approach and cross-country convergence of incomes,” EPL, vol. 94, no. 4, Article ID 48001, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  62. R. F. da Paz, R. S. Ehlers, and J. L. Bazán, “A weibull mixture model for the votes of a Brazilian political party,” in Interdisciplinary Bayesian Statistics, vol. 118 of Springer Proceedings in Mathematics & Statistics, pp. 229–241, Springer International Publishing, Berlin, Germany, 2015. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  63. M. Ausloos and F. Petroni, “Statistical dynamics of religions and adherents,” EPL, vol. 77, no. 3, Article ID 38002, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  64. F. Bass, “A new product growth model for consumer durables,” Management Science, vol. 15, pp. 215–227, 1969. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  65. J. M. Pasteels, J. L. Deneubourg, and S. Goss, “Self-organization mechanisms in ant societies (I): trail recruitment to newly discovered food sources,” in From Individual to Collective Behaviour in Social Insects, J. M. Pasteels and and J. L. Deneubourg, Eds., pp. 155–175, Birkhauser, Basel, Switzerland, 1987. View at Google Scholar
  66. J. M. Pasteels, J. L. Deneubourg, and S. Goss, “Self-organization mechanisms in ant societies (II): learning in foraging and division of labor,” in From Individual to Collective Behaviour in Social Insects, J. M. Pasteels and and J. L. Deneubourg, Eds., 196, p. 177, Birkhauser, Basel, Switzerland, 1987. View at Google Scholar
  67. G. S. Becker, “A note on restaurant pricing and other examples of social influences on price,” Journal of Political Economy, vol. 99, no. 5, pp. 1109–1116, 1991. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  68. A. Ishii, H. Arakaki, N. Matsuda et al., “The 'hit' phenomenon: a mathematical model of human dynamics interactions as a stochastic process,” New Journal of Physics, vol. 14, Article ID 063018, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  69. N. G. van Kampen, Stochastic Process in Physics and Chemistry, 2007. View at MathSciNet
  70. A. Kononovicius and V. Gontis, “Three-state herding model of the financial markets,” EPL, vol. 101, no. 2, Article ID 28001, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  71. S. Alfarano and M. Milakovi\'c, “Network structure and -dependence in agent-based herding models,” Journal of Economic Dynamics & Control, vol. 33, no. 1, pp. 78–92, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at MathSciNet
  72. A. Kononovicius and J. Ruseckas, “Continuous transition from the extensive to the non-extensive statistics in an agent-based herding model,” The European Physical Journal B, vol. 87, no. 8, article 169, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus