1. A Theory of Small Campaign Contributions. (2024). Castanheira, Micael ; Drazen, Allan ; de Moura, Micael Castanheira ; Bouton, Laurent.
   In: ULB Institutional Repository.
   RePEc:ulb:ulbeco:2013/378528.

   Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

2. The petit effect of campaign spending on votes. Using political financing reforms to measure spending impacts in multiparty elections. (2023). Wilner, Lionel ; François, Abel ; Franois, Abel ; Visser, Michael.
   In: Post-Print.
   RePEc:hal:journl:hal-03924628.

   Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

3. Reputation Shocks and Strategic Responses in Electoral Campaigns. (2021). Cazenave, Ruben Poblete.
   In: Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers.
   RePEc:tin:wpaper:20210049.

   Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

4. It Takes Money to Make MPs: Evidence from 150 Years of British Campaign Spending. (2021). Cagé, Julia ; Cage, Julia ; Dewitte, Edgard.
   In: Sciences Po publications.
   RePEc:spo:wpmain:info:hdl:2441/1dp7827s4n8ht8fk3qhmeuvd0o.

   Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

5. It Takes Money to Make MPs: Evidence from 150 Years of British Campaign Spending. (2021). Cagé, Julia ; Cage, Julia ; Dewitte, Edgard.
   In: Sciences Po Economics Discussion Papers.
   RePEc:spo:wpecon:info:hdl:2441/1dp7827s4n8ht8fk3qhmeuvd0o.

   Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

6. It Takes Money to Make MPs: Evidence from 150 Years of British Campaign Spending. (2021). Cagé, Julia ; Cage, Julia ; Dewitte, Edgard.
   In: SciencePo Working papers.
   RePEc:hal:wpspec:hal-03384143.

   Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

7. It Takes Money to Make MPs: Evidence from 150 Years of British Campaign Spending. (2021). Cagé, Julia ; Cage, Julia ; Dewitte, Edgard.
   In: Working Papers.
   RePEc:hal:wpaper:hal-03384143.

   Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

8. It Takes Money to Make MPs: Evidence from 150 Years of British Campaign Spending. (2021). Cagé, Julia ; Cage, Julia ; Dewitte, Edgard.
   In: SciencePo Working papers Main.
   RePEc:hal:spmain:hal-03384143.

   Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

1. Abramowitz, A. I. (1988). Explaining senate election outcomes. American Political Science Review, 82(2):385–403.

2. Acharya, A., Grillo, E., Sugaya, T., and Turkel, E. (2019). Dynamic Campaign Spending. techreport.

3. Adams, J. (2012). Causes and Electoral Consequences of Party Policy Shifts in Multiparty Elections: Theoretical Results and Empirical Evidence. Annual Review of Political Science, 15(1):401–419.
   Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
   
4. Adams, J. and Somer-Topcu, Z. (2009). Moderate Now, Win Votes Later: The Electoral Consequences of Parties’ Policy Shifts in 25 Postwar Democracies. The Journal of Politics, 71(2):678–692.
   Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
   
5. Adams, J. F., Merrill III, S., and Grofman, B. (2005). A Unified Theory of Party Competition: A Cross-National Analysis Integrating Spatial and Behavioral Factors. Cambridge University Press.
   Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
   
6. Adams, J., Merrill, S., Simas, E. N., and Stone, W. J. (2011). When Candidates Value Good Character: A Spatial Model with Applications to Congressional Elections. The Journal of Politics, 73(1):17–30.
   Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
   
7. Alvarez, R. M. and Nagler, J. (1998). When Politics and Models Collide: Estimating Models of Multiparty Elections. American Journal of Political Science, 42(1):55–96.
   Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
   

8. Ansolabehere, S. and Snyder, J. M. (2000). Valence Politics and Equilibrium in Spatial Election Models. Public Choice, 103(3/4):327–336.

9. Ansolabehere, S., de Figueiredo, J. M., and Snyder, J. M. J. (2003). Why is There so Little Money in U.S. Politics? Journal of Economic Perspectives, 17(1):105–130.

10. Aragones, E. and Palfrey, T. R. (2002). Mixed Equilibrium in a Downsian Model with a Favored Candidate. Journal of Economic Theory, 103(1):131–161.

11. Avis, E., Ferraz, C., Finan, F., and Varjão, C. (2017). Money and Politics: The Effects of Campaign Spending Limits on Political Competition and Incumbency Advantage. Working Paper 23508, National Bureau of Economic Research.

12. Baron, D. P. (1994). Electoral Competition with Informed and Uniformed Voters. The American Political Science Review, 88(1):33–47.

13. Ben-Bassat, A., Dahan, M., and Klor, E. F. (2015). Does Campaign Spending Affect Electoral Outcomes? Electoral Studies, 40(1):102–114.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
    

14. Berry, S., Levinsohn, J., and Pakes, A. (1995). Automobile Prices in Market Equilibrium. Econometrica, 63(4):841–890.

15. Bouton, L., Castanheira, M., and Drazen, A. (2018). A Theory of Small Campaign Contributions. NBER Working Papers 24413, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.

16. Bursztyn, L., Egorov, G., and Fiorin, S. (2017). From Extreme to Mainstream: How Social Norms Unravel. NBER Working Papers 23415, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.

17. Cagé, J. (2018). Le prix de la démocratie. Fayard (English version: The Price of Democracy, Harvard University Press, 2020).
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
    

18. Cagé, J. (2020). Media Competition, Information Provision and Political Participation: Evidence from French Local Newspapers and Elections, 1944-2014. Journal of Public Economics, 185.

19. Cagé, J. and Dewitte, E. (2018). It Takes Money to Make MPs : New Evidence from 150 Years of British Campaign Spending. techreport.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
    
20. Cagé, J. and Dewitte, E. (2020). The Rising Demand for Representation: Evidence from a 100 of British Political Selection. Working paper.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
    
21. Carvalho, B. (2020). Campaign Spending on Local Elections: the More the Merrier? Working paper.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
    

22. Coate, S. (2004a). Pareto-Improving Campaign Finance Policy. The American Economic Review, 94(3):628–655.

23. Coate, S. (2004b). Political Competition with Campaign Contributions and Informative Advertising. Journal of the European Economic Association, 2(5):772–804.

24. Cox, G. (1997). Making Votes Count. Cambridge University Press.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
    

25. Da Silveira, B. S. and De Mello, J. M. P. (2011). Campaign Advertising and Election Outcomes: Quasinatural Experiment Evidence from Gubernatorial Elections in Brazil. The Review of Economic Studies, 78(2):590–612.

26. Dal Bo, E., Finan, F., Folke, O., Persson, T., and Rickne, J. (2019). Economic And Social Outsiders But Political Insiders: Sweden’s Radical Right. Technical report.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
    

27. de Figueiredo, J. M., Ji, C. H., and Kousser, T. (2011). Financing Direct Democracy: Revisiting the Research on Campaign Spending and Citizen Initiatives. Journal of Law, Economics, & Organization, 27(3):485–514.

28. Dharmapala, D. and Palda, F. (2002). Are Campaign Contributions a Form of Speech? Evidence from Recent US House Elections. Public Choice, 112(1/2):81–114.

29. Downs, A. (1957). An Economic Theory of Democracy. Harper.

30. Duffy, J. and Tavits, M. (2008). Beliefs and Voting Decisions: A Test of the Pivotal Voter Model. American Journal of Political Science, 52(3):603–618.

31. Duverger, M. (1954). Political Parties. John Wiley & Sons.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
    
32. Enos, R. D., Fowler, A., and Vavreck, L. (2014). Increasing Inequality: The Effect of GOTV Mobilization on the Composition of the Electorate. The Journal of Politics, 76(1):273–288.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
    

33. Epstein, D. and Zemsky, P. (1995). Money Talks: Deterring Quality Challengers in Congressional Elections. The American Political Science Review, 89(2):295–308.

34. Erikson, R. S. and Palfrey, T. R. (1998). Campaign Spending and Incumbency: An Alternative Simultaneous Equations Approach. The Journal of Politics, 60(2):355–373.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
    

35. Feigenbaum, J. J. and Shelton, C. A. (2013). The Vicious Cycle: Fundraising and Perceived Viability in US Presidential Primaries. Quarterly Journal of Political Science, 8(1):1–40.

36. Fleitas, D. W. (1971). Bandwagon and Underdog Effects in Minimal-Information Elections. American Political Science Review, 65(2):434–438.

37. Foucault, M. and François, A. (2005). Le rendement des dépenses électorales en France. Le cas des élections législatives de 1997. Revue économique, 56(5):1125–1143.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
    

38. François, A., Visser, M., and Wilner, L. (2016). Using Political Financing Reforms to Measure Campaign Spending Effects on Electoral Outcomes. CESifo Working Paper 6232.

39. Gartner, M. (1976). Endogenous Bandwagon and Underdog Effects in a Rational Choice Model. Public Choice, 25:83–89.

40. Gerber, A. (1998). Estimating the Effect of Campaign Spending on Senate Election Outcomes Using Instrumental Variables. The American Political Science Review, 92(2):401–411.

41. Gerber, A. S. (2004). Does Campaign Spending Work? American Behavioral Scientist, 47(5):541–574.

42. Gerber, A. S. and Green, D. P. (2000). The Effects of Canvassing, Telephone Calls, and Direct Mail on Voter Turnout: A Field Experiment. The American Political Science Review, 94(3):pp. 653–663.

43. Gerber, A., Hoffman, M., Morgan, J., and Raymond, C. (2020). One in a Million: Field Experiments on Perceived Closeness of the Election and Voter Turnout. American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, 12(3):287–325.

44. Green, D. P. and Krasno, J. S. (1988). Salvation for the Spendthrift Incumbent: Reestimating the Effects of Campaign Spending in House Elections. American Journal of Political Science, 32(4):884–907.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
    

45. Großer, J. and Schram, A. (2010). Public Opinion Polls, Voter Turnout, and Welfare: An Experimental Study. American Journal of Political Science, 54(3):700–717.

46. Groseclose, T. (2001). A Model of Candidate Location When One Candidate Has a Valence Advantage. American Journal of Political Science, 45(4):862–886.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
    

47. Grossman, G. M. and Helpman, E. (1996). Electoral Competition and Special Interest Politics. The Review of Economic Studies, 63(2):265–286.

48. Grossman, G. M. and Helpman, E. (2001). Special Interest Politics. MIT Press.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
    
49. Gunlicks, A. B. (1993). Campaign and Party Finance in North America and Western Europe. Westview Press.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
    

50. Guriev, S. and Papaioannou, E. (2020). The Political Economy of Populism. Technical report.

51. Harteveld, E., Dahlberg, S., Kokkonen, A., and Van Der Brug, W. (2019a). Gender Differences in Vote Choice: Social Cues and Social Harmony as Heuristics. British Journal of Political Science, 49(3):1141–1161.

52. Harteveld, E., Dahlberg, S., Kokkonen, A., and van der Brug, W. (2019b). Social Stigma and Support for the Populist Radical Right: An Experimental Study. Scandinavian Political Studies, 42(3-4):296–307.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
    

53. Helsley, R. W. and O’Sullivan, A. (1994). Altruistic voting and campaign contributions. Journal of Public Economics, 55(1):107–119.

54. Herrera, H., Levine, D. K., and Martinelli, C. (2008). Policy platforms, campaign spending and voter participation. Journal of Public Economics, 92(3-4):501–513.

55. Herriot, J. G. and Reinsch, C. H. (1973). Algorithm 472: procedures for natural spline interpolation [E1]. Commun. ACM, 16(12):763–768.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
    

56. Honaker, J., Katz, J. N., and King, G. (2002). A Fast, Easy, and Efficient Estimator for Multiparty Electoral Data. Political Analysis, 10(1):84–100.

57. Jacobson, G. C. (1978). The Effects of Campaign Spending in Congressional Elections. The American Political Science Review, 72(2):469–491.

58. Jacobson, G. C. (1980). Money in Congressional Elections. Yale University Press.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
    

59. Jacobson, G. C. (1985). Money and Votes Reconsidered: Congressional Elections, 1972-1982. Public Choice, 47(1):7–62.

60. Jacobson, G. C. (1990). The Effects of Campaign Spending in House Elections: New Evidence for Old Arguments. American Journal of Political Science, 34(2):334–362.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
    
61. Jacobson, G. C. (2006). Campaign spending effects in U.S. Senate elections: Evidence from the National Annenberg Election Survey. Electoral Studies, 25(2):195–226.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
    
62. Jacobson, G. C. (2015). How Do Campaigns Matter? Annual Review of Political Science, 18(1):31–47.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
    
63. Johnston, R. and Pattie, C. (2014). Money and Electoral Politics. Local Parties and Funding in General Elections. Policy Press.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
    

64. Kalla, J. L. and Broockman, D. E. (2018). The Minimal Persuasive Effects of Campaign Contact in General Elections: Evidence from 49 Field Experiments. American Political Science Review, 112(1):148–166.

65. Katz, J. N. and King, G. (1999). A Statistical Model for Multiparty Electoral Data. The American Political Science Review, 93(1):15–32.

66. Kestilä-Kekkonen, E. and Söderlund, P. (2014). Party, leader or candidate? dissecting the right-wing populist vote in Finland. European Political Science Review, 6(4):641–662.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
    

67. King, G., Honaker, J., Joseph, A., and Scheve, K. (2001). Analyzing Incomplete Political Science Data: An Alternative Algorithm for Multiple Imputation. The American Political Science Review, 95(1):49–69.

68. Larcinese, V. and Miner, L. (2018). Was Obama Elected by the Internet? Broadband Diffusion and Voters’ Behavior in US Presidential Elections. Technical report.

69. Larreguy, H. A., Marshall, J., and Snyder, J. J. M. (2018). Leveling the playing field: How campaign advertising can help non-dominant parties. Journal of the European Economic Association, 16(6):1812–1849.

70. Le Bras, H. (2015). Le pari du FN. Angles et Reliefs. Autrement.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
    
71. Le Pennec-Caldichoury, C. (2019). Strategic Campaign Communication: Evidence from 30,000 Candidate Manifestos. Working paper.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
    

72. Lenz, G. S. (2009). Learning and Opinion Change, Not Priming: Reconsidering the Priming Hypothesis. American Journal of Political Science, 53(4):821–837.

73. Levitt, S. D. (1994). Using Repeat Challengers to Estimate the Effect of Campaign Spending on Election Outcomes in the U.S. House. Journal of Political Economy, 102(4):777–798.

74. Lohmann, S. (1993). A Signaling Model of Informative and Manipulative Political Action. The American Political Science Review, 87(2):319–333.

75. Nassmacher, K.-H. (2009). The Funding of Party Competition: Political Finance in 25 Democracies. Nomos.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
    
76. Nevo, A. (2000). A Practitioner’s Guide to Estimation of Random-Coefficients Logit Models of Demand. Journal of economics & management strategy, 9(4):513–548.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
    

77. Palda, F. and Palda, K. (1998). The Impact of Campaign Expenditures on Political Competition in the French Legislative Elections of 1993. Public Choice, 94(1/2):157–174.

78. Panagopoulos, C. (2016). All about that base: Changing campaign strategies in U.S. Presidential elections. Party Politics, 22(2):179–190.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
    

79. Panagopoulos, C. and Green, D. P. (2008). Field Experiments Testing the Impact of Radio on Electoral Advertisements Competition. American Journal of Political Science, 52(1):156–168.

80. Peterson, D. A. M. (2009). Campaign Learning and Vote Determinants. American Journal of Political Science, 53(2):445–460.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
    

81. Potters, J., Sloof, R., and van Winden, F. (1997). Campaign expenditures, contributions and direct endorsements: The strategic use of information and money to influence voter behavior. European Journal of Political Economy, 13(1):1–31.

82. Prat, A. (2002a). Campaign Advertising and Voter Welfare. The Review of Economic Studies, 69(4):999–1017.

83. Prat, A. (2002b). Campaign Spending with Office-Seeking Politicians, Rational Voters, and Multiple Lobbies. Journal of Economic Theory, 103(1):162–189.

84. Rekkas, M. (2007). The Impact of Campaign Spending on Votes in Multiparty Elections. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 89(3):573–585.

85. Scarrow, S. (2007). Political Finance in Comparative Perspective. Annual Review of Political Science, 10:193–210.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
    

86. Schultz, C. (2007). Strategic Campaigns and Redistributive Politics. The Economic Journal, 117(522):936–963.

87. Simon, H. A. (1954). Bandwagon and Underdog Effects and the Possibility of Election Predictions. The Public Opinion Quarterly, 18(3):245–253.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
    

88. Snyder, J. M., Prat, A., and Puglisi, R. (2010). Is Private Campaign Finance a Good Thing? Estimates of the Potential Information Benefits. Quarterly Journal of Political Science, 5(3):291–318.

89. Speck, B. (2013). Money in Politics: Sound Political Competition and Trust in Government. Oecd background paper.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
    

90. Spenkuch, J. L. and Toniatti, D. (2018). Political Advertising and Election Results. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 133(4):1981–2036.

91. Stock, J. H. and Yogo, M. (2005). Testing for Weak Instruments in Linear IV Regression. In Identification and Inference for Econometric Models: Essays in Honor of Thomas Rothenberg, pages pp. 80–108. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
    
92. Stockemer, D., Lentz, T., and Mayer, D. (2018). Individual Predictors of the Radical Right-Wing Vote in Europe: A Meta-Analysis of Articles in Peer-Reviewed Journals (1995–2016). Government and Opposition, 53(3):569–593.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
    

93. Stone, W. J. and Simas, E. N. (2010). Candidate Valence and Ideological Positions in U.S. House Elections. American Journal of Political Science, 54(2):371–388.

94. Tomz, M., Tucker, J. A., and Wittenberg, J. (2002). An Easy and Accurate Regression Model for Multiparty Electoral Data. Political Analysis, 10(1):66–83.

95. Vanberg, C. (2008). “One Man, One Dollar”? Campaign contribution limits, equal influence, and political communication. Journal of Public Economics, 92(3–4):514–531.

96. Williams, L. K. and Whitten, G. D. (2015). Don’t Stand So Close to Me: Spatial Contagion Effects and Party Competition. American Journal of Political Science, 59(2):309–325.

97. Zaller, J. R. (1992). The Nature and Origins of Mass Opinion. Cambridge University Press. 0 20 40 60 80 100 0 20 40 60 80 100 0 20 40 60 80 100 1993 1997 2002 2007 2012 2017 Share of total votes (1st round) Share of total spending (a) French Legislative Elections 0 20 40 60 80 100 0 20 40 60 80 100 0 20 40 60 80 100 1997 2001 2005 2010 2015 2017 Share of total votes Share of total spending (b) UK General Elections
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
    

1. The Heterogeneous Price of a Vote: Evidence from Multiparty Systems, 1993-2017. (2022). Cagé, Julia ; Bekkouche, Yasmine ; Cage, Julia ; Dewitte, Edgard.
   In: PSE-Ecole d'économie de Paris (Postprint).
   RePEc:hal:pseptp:hal-03389172.

   Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

2. The Heterogeneous Price of a Vote: Evidence from Multiparty Systems, 1993-2017. (2022). Cagé, Julia ; Dewitte, Edgard ; Bekkouche, Yasmine ; Cage, Julia.
   In: Post-Print.
   RePEc:hal:journl:hal-03389172.

   Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

3. The heterogeneous price of a vote: Evidence from multiparty systems, 1993–2017. (2022). Cagé, Julia ; Bekkouche, Yasmine ; Cage, Julia ; Dewitte, Edgard.
   In: Journal of Public Economics.
   RePEc:eee:pubeco:v:206:y:2022:i:c:s004727272100195x.

   Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

4. STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS OF TULLOCK CONTESTS WITH AN APPLICATION TO U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ELECTIONS. (2021). Huang, Yangguang ; He, Ming.
   In: International Economic Review.
   RePEc:wly:iecrev:v:62:y:2021:i:3:p:1011-1054.

   Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

5. The impact of political representation on the provision of public goods and services. (2021). Schneider, Rodrigo ; Athias, Diloa.
   In: Fiscal Studies.
   RePEc:wly:fistud:v:42:y:2021:i:2:p:367-381.

   Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

6. It Takes Money to Make MPs: Evidence from 150 Years of British Campaign Spending. (2021). Cagé, Julia ; Cage, Julia ; Dewitte, Edgard.
   In: Sciences Po publications.
   RePEc:spo:wpmain:info:hdl:2441/1dp7827s4n8ht8fk3qhmeuvd0o.

   Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

7. It Takes Money to Make MPs: Evidence from 150 Years of British Campaign Spending. (2021). Cagé, Julia ; Cage, Julia ; Dewitte, Edgard.
   In: Sciences Po Economics Discussion Papers.
   RePEc:spo:wpecon:info:hdl:2441/1dp7827s4n8ht8fk3qhmeuvd0o.

   Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

8. It Takes Money to Make MPs: Evidence from 150 Years of British Campaign Spending. (2021). Cagé, Julia ; Cage, Julia ; Dewitte, Edgard.
   In: Working Papers.
   RePEc:hal:wpaper:hal-03384143.

   Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

9. The Heterogeneous Price of a Vote: Evidence from Multiparty Systems, 1993-2017. (2020). Cagé, Julia ; Bekkouche, Yasmine ; Dewitte, Edgard.
   In: Sciences Po publications.
   RePEc:spo:wpmain:info:hdl:2441/10lirmbd5p8h4ae52oi51b4cka.

   Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

10. The Heterogeneous Price of a Vote: Evidence from Multiparty Systems, 1993-2017. (2020). Cagé, Julia ; Bekkouche, Yasmine ; Dewitte, Edgard.
    In: Sciences Po Economics Discussion Papers.
    RePEc:spo:wpecon:info:hdl:2441/10lirmbd5p8h4ae52oi51b4cka.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

11. The Heterogeneous Price of a Vote: Evidence from Multiparty Systems, 1993-2017. (2020). Bekkouche, Yasmine ; Cage, Julia ; Dewitte, Edgard.
    In: Working Papers.
    RePEc:hal:wpaper:hal-03389172.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

12. Politically Connected Governments. (2020). Mehta, Mihir N ; Kim, Jungbae ; Cuny, Christine.
    In: Journal of Accounting Research.
    RePEc:bla:joares:v:58:y:2020:i:4:p:915-952.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

13. The Heterogeneous Price of a Vote: Evidence from France, 1993-2014. (2019). Cagé, Julia ; Bekkouche, Yasmine.
    In: Sciences Po publications.
    RePEc:spo:wpmain:info:hdl:2441/2ahul47tb09rvqfl9eelv7o5ca.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

14. The Heterogeneous Price of a Vote: Evidence from France, 1993-2014. (2019). Cagé, Julia ; Bekkouche, Yasmine.
    In: Sciences Po Economics Discussion Papers.
    RePEc:spo:wpecon:info:hdl:2441/2ahul47tb09rvqfl9eelv7o5ca.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

15. The Heterogeneous Price of a Vote: Evidence from France, 1993-2014. (2019). Cagé, Julia ; Bekkouche, Yasmine ; Cage, Julia.
    In: Working Papers.
    RePEc:hal:wpaper:hal-03393084.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

16. The Impact of Incumbent Scandals on Senate Elections, 1972–2016. (2019). Long, Nicholas Chad.
    In: Social Sciences.
    RePEc:gam:jscscx:v:8:y:2019:i:4:p:114-:d:220262.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

17. Inside the revolving door: campaign finance, lobbying meetings and public contracts. An investigation for Argentina. (2019). Moncarz, Pedro ; Freille, S ; Sofietti, P ; Avramovich, C.
    In: Research Department working papers.
    RePEc:dbl:dblwop:1392.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

18. Limits of regulatory responsiveness: Democratic credentials of responsive regulation. (2018). Hong, Seunghun ; You, Jongsung.
    In: Regulation & Governance.
    RePEc:wly:reggov:v:12:y:2018:i:3:p:413-427.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

19. The Price of a Vote: Evidence from France, 1993-2014. (2018). Cagé, Julia ; Bekkouche, Yasmine.
    In: Working Papers Series.
    RePEc:thk:wpaper:68.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

20. The Price of a Vote: Evidence from France, 1993-2014. (2018). Cagé, Julia ; Bekkouche, Yasmine ; Cage, Julia.
    In: Sciences Po publications.
    RePEc:spo:wpmain:info:hdl:2441/7rcgbs4v788terphdvb6a5e8t8.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

21. The Price of a Vote: Evidence from France, 1993-2014. (2018). Cagé, Julia ; Bekkouche, Yasmine ; Cage, Julia.
    In: Working Papers.
    RePEc:hal:wpaper:hal-03393149.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

22. Incumbency Advantage in an Electoral Contest. (2018). Pastine, Ivan ; Cole, Matthew.
    In: The Economic and Social Review.
    RePEc:eso:journl:v:49:y:2018:i:4:p:419-436.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

23. The Price of a Vote: Evidence from France, 1993-2014. (2018). Cagé, Julia ; Bekkouche, Yasmine ; Cage, Julia.
    In: CEPR Discussion Papers.
    RePEc:cpr:ceprdp:12614.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

24. Electoral Verdicts: Incumbent President Defeated for Re-election in Nigeria. (2016). Awojobi, Oladayo Nathaniel.
    In: Noble International Journal of Social Sciences Research.
    RePEc:nap:nijssr:2016:p:21-30.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

25. Using Political Financing Reforms to Measure Campaign Spending Effects on Electoral Outcomes. (2016). Wilner, Lionel ; visser, michael ; François, Abel ; Franois, Abel.
    In: CESifo Working Paper Series.
    RePEc:ces:ceswps:_6232.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

26. Do private campaing contributions affect electoral results? An examination of Argentine national elections. (2015). Freille, Sebastian.
    In: MPRA Paper.
    RePEc:pra:mprapa:65455.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

27. .

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

28. Google Insights and U.S. Senate Elections: Does Search Traffic Provide a Valid Measure of Public Attention to Political Candidates?. (2014). Ripberger, Joseph T. ; Swearingen, Douglas C..
    In: Social Science Quarterly.
    RePEc:bla:socsci:v:95:y:2014:i:3:p:882-893.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

29. The effects of earmarks on the likelihood of reelection. (2013). Stratmann, Thomas.
    In: European Journal of Political Economy.
    RePEc:eee:poleco:v:32:y:2013:i:c:p:341-355.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

30. Measuring efficiency in the presence of head-to-head competition. (2012). Sexton, Thomas ; Lewis, Herbert .
    In: Journal of Productivity Analysis.
    RePEc:kap:jproda:v:38:y:2012:i:2:p:183-197.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

31. Incumbency advantage and political campaign spending limits. (2012). Pastine, Ivan.
    In: Journal of Public Economics.
    RePEc:eee:pubeco:v:96:y:2012:i:1:p:20-32.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

32. The effects of party campaign spending under proportional representation: Evidence from Germany. (2012). Fink, Alexander.
    In: European Journal of Political Economy.
    RePEc:eee:poleco:v:28:y:2012:i:4:p:574-592.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

33. An Experimental Study of Alternative Campaign Finance Systems: Donations, Elections and Policy Choices. (2011). Zillante, Arthur ; Fang, Hanming ; Shapiro, Dmitry A..
    In: NBER Working Papers.
    RePEc:nbr:nberwo:17384.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

34. Oil, Corruption, and Vote-buying: A Review of the Case of São Tomé and Príncipe. (2011). Vicente, Pedro C..
    In: Chapters.
    RePEc:elg:eechap:14003_12.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

35. Political campaign spending limits. (2010). Pastine, Ivan.
    In: Working Papers.
    RePEc:ucn:wpaper:201034.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

36. Political Campaign Spending Limits. (2010). Pastine, Ivan.
    In: Economics Department Working Paper Series.
    RePEc:may:mayecw:n213-10.pdf.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

37. Issue Voting and Crime in Gubernatorial Elections*. (2009). Cummins, Jeff .
    In: Social Science Quarterly.
    RePEc:bla:socsci:v:90:y:2009:i:3:p:632-651.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

38. The Campaign Value of Incumbency: A New Solution to the Puzzle of Less Effective Incumbent Spending. (2008). Marsh, Michael ; Benoit, Kenneth.
    In: American Journal of Political Science.
    RePEc:wly:amposc:v:52:y:2008:i:4:p:874-890.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

39. Policy Responsiveness and Incumbent Reelection in State Legislatures. (2008). Hogan, Robert E.
    In: American Journal of Political Science.
    RePEc:wly:amposc:v:52:y:2008:i:4:p:858-873.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

40. The impact of money on elections: evidence from open seat races in the United States House of Representatives, 1990-2004. (2008). Franklin Mixon, Jr., ; Duquette, Christopher.
    In: Economics Bulletin.
    RePEc:ebl:ecbull:v:4:y:2008:i:2:p:1-12.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

41. The impact of money on elections: evidence from open seat races in the United States House of Representatives, 1990-2004. (2008). Mixon, Franklin ; Caudill, Steven B ; Franklin Mixon, Jr., ; Duquette, Christopher.
    In: Economics Bulletin.
    RePEc:ebl:ecbull:eb-08d70004.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

42. An empirical test of why incumbents adopt campaign spending limits. (2007). Evans, Thomas.
    In: Public Choice.
    RePEc:kap:pubcho:v:132:y:2007:i:3:p:437-456.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

43. Selling Favors in the Lab: Experiments on Campaign Finance Reform. (2006). Stratmann, Thomas ; Houser, Daniel.
    In: CESifo Working Paper Series.
    RePEc:ces:ceswps:_1727.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

44. Some talk: Money in politics. A (partial) review of the literature. (2005). Stratmann, Thomas.
    In: Public Choice.
    RePEc:kap:pubcho:v:124:y:2005:i:1:p:135-156.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

45. Evidence on the importance of spatial voting models in presidential nominations and elections. (2005). Lotfinia, Babak .
    In: Public Choice.
    RePEc:kap:pubcho:v:123:y:2005:i:3:p:439-462.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

46. Does campaign spending work?. (2004). Gerber, Alan.
    In: Natural Field Experiments.
    RePEc:feb:natura:00246.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

47. Power-hungry Candidates, Policy Favors, and Pareto Improving Campaign Finance Policy. (2003). Coate, Stephen.
    In: NBER Working Papers.
    RePEc:nbr:nberwo:9601.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

48. Why Do Political Action Committees Give Money to Candidates? Campaign Contributions, Policy Choices, and Election Outcomes. (2000). Magee, Christopher.
    In: Macroeconomics.
    RePEc:wpa:wuwpma:0004038.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

49. The Electoral Effects of Campaign Spending in House Elections: A Natural Experiment Approach. (1998). Milyo, Jeffrey.
    In: Discussion Papers Series, Department of Economics, Tufts University.
    RePEc:tuf:tuftec:9806.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

50. Using Repeat Challengers to Estimate the Effect of Campaign Spending on Election Outcomes in the U.S. House.. (1994). Levitt, Steven.
    In: Journal of Political Economy.
    RePEc:ucp:jpolec:v:102:y:1994:i:4:p:777-98.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

Report date: 2025-09-30 22:53:26 || Missing content? Let us know