Election predictions: Reply

Inquiry 25 (3):361 – 364 (1982)
Contrary to Aubert's claim, my paper on election predictions does not seek to draw empirical conclusions from mathematical premisses alone. The empirical premiss, approximated by the continuity assumption, is that sufficiently small changes in the predicted vote will cause only small changes in the actual vote. The technical criticisms by ?fsti and ?sterberg of the reaction function are answered by specifying the function's domain. Other criticisms are also answered, and the reply concludes by placing the election prediction theorem in the context of other theorizing about human expectations and outguessing phenomena
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories No categories specified
(categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1080/00201748208601973
 Save to my reading list
Follow the author(s)
My bibliography
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Revision history Request removal from index
Download options
PhilPapers Archive

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy on self-archival     Papers currently archived: 23,209
External links
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library
References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA
Esther-Mirjam Sent (2001). Sent Simulating Simon Simulating Scientists. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 32 (3):479-500.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Monthly downloads

Added to index


Total downloads

11 ( #384,386 of 1,941,042 )

Recent downloads (6 months)

1 ( #458,101 of 1,941,042 )

How can I increase my downloads?

My notes
Sign in to use this feature

Start a new thread
There  are no threads in this forum
Nothing in this forum yet.