The classical theories of voting behavior and explanations for geography of voting

The article examines the capacities and limitations of classical theories of voting behavior for explaining the phenomena of voting geography and electoral statistics. The article is based on an analysis of scientific literature on electoral geography and theoretical models of voting behavior since the early 20th century. A clarification of existing scientific approaches to systematizing theories of voting behavior is proposed. Holistic and individualistic approaches to understanding voting behavior are examined. It identifies the limitations of most classical theories of voting behavior, based on methodological individualism and use sociological surveys as the primary source of empirical information to explain the geography of voting and voting behavior phenomena manifested at the aggregate level. There are identified phenomena in the geography of voting, revealed at the level of electoral statistics and that cannot be explained from the standpoint of methodological individualism. One of these phenomena is the composition effect: the presence of a stable combination of several indicators of electoral behavior in a territorial community of voters, which is reproduced with high accuracy in other territorial communities with similar social conditions. Another wellknown phenomenon is the influence of electorate size on the characteristics of voter behavior. A key problem in the study of voting behavior is the lack of a theoretical solution to the problem of transitioning between the individual and group levels of manifestation of voting behavior phenomena.

1. Agnew J. Mapping politics: how context counts in electoral geography. Political geography. 1996, Vol. 15, N 2, P. 129–146.

2. Agnew J. Place and politics: the geographical mediation of state and society. Boston: Allen & Unwin, 1987, 267 p.

3. Azevedo D.A. The need for electoral geography: the possibilities in the field. Geousp. 2023, Vol. 27, N 2, Article e-204649. DOI: http://www.doi.org/10.11606/issn.2179-0892.geousp.2023.204649.en

4. Azevedo D.A., Meireles B.L. Territorial and electorate size influence: participation / competitiveness in Costa Rica’s 2016 local scale elections. Cuadernos de geografía: revista colombiana de geografía. 2021, Vol. 30, N 1, P. 25–44.

5. Berelson B.R., Lazarsfeld P.F., Mcphee W.N. Voting: a study of opinion formation in a presidential campaign. Chicago: Chicago university press, 1954, 395 p.

6. Bhaskar R. Emergence, explanation, and emancipation. In: Secord P.F. (ed.). Explaining human behavior. Beverly Hills: Sage, 1982, P. 275–310.

7. Bølstad J. Is there a rational public? In: Fisher J., Fieldhouse E., Franklin M. N., Gibson R., Cantijoch M., Wlezien Ch. (eds). The Routledge handbook of elections, voting behavior and public opinion. London: Routledge, 2017, P. 383–393.

8. Borodin A.D. Coordination of collective actions in the behavior of Russian voters. Economic journal of the higher school of economics. 2005, Vol. 9, N 1, P. 74–81. (In Russ.)

9. Brady H., Sniderman P.M. Attitude attribution: a group basis for political reasoning. American political science review. 1985, Vol. 79, N 4, P. 1061–1078.

10. Campbell A., Gurin G., Miller W.E. The voter decides. Evanston: Row, Peterson, and Co., 1954, 242 p.

11. Clarke H.D., Sanders D., Stewart M.C., Whiteley P. Performance politics and the British voter. Cambridge: Cambridge university press, 2009, 372 p.

12. Coleman S. The Effect of social conformity on collective voting behavior. Political analysis. 2004, Vol. 12, P. 76–96.

13. Cox K.R. The voting decision in a spatial context. In: Board C., Charley R.J., Haggett P. (eds). Progress in geography: international reviews of current research. New York: St. Martin’s, 1969, P. 81–117

14. Downs A. An economic theory of democracy. New York: Harper, 1957, 321 p.

15. Edlin A., Gelman A., Kaplan N. Rational voting and voter turnout. Rationality and society. 2007, Vol. 19, N 3, P. 293–314.

16. Feddersen T., Sandroni A. A theory of participation in elections. American economic review. 2006, Vol. 96, N 4, P. 1271–1282. DOI: http://www.doi.org/10.1257/aer.96.4.1271

17. Fiorina M.P. Retrospective voting in American national elections. New Haven, 1981, 249 p.

18. Flint C., Taylor P. Political geography: world-economy, nation-state and locality. London: Routledge, 1980, 391 p.

19. Fowler J., Kam C. Beyond the self: social identity, altruism, and political participation. Journal of politics. 2007, Vol. 69, N 3, P. 813–827.

20. Gainsborough J.F. Voters in context: cities, suburbs, and presidential vote. American politics research. 2005, Vol. 33, N 3, P. 435–461. DOI: http://www.doi.org/10.1177/1532673X04266637

21. Gerber A., Rogers T. Descriptive social norms and motivation to vote: everybody’s voting and so should you. Journal of politics. 2009, Vol. 71, P. 178–191.

22. Gosnell H., Pearson N. The study of voting behavior by correlational techniques. American sociological review. 1939, Vol. 4, N 6, P. 809–815.

23. Grishin N.V. Stability of territorial differences in population`s electoral preferences (the case of the South of Russia). Political expertise: POLITEX. 2006, N 2, P. 36–42. (In Russ.)

24. Heath J. Methodological individualism. The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy (Summer 2024 edition). In: Zalta E.N., Nodelman U. (eds). URL: https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2024/entries/methodological-individualism (accessed 20.11.2025).

25. Hutchings V., Jefferson H. The sociological and social-psychological approaches. In: Fisher J., Fieldhouse E., Franklin M.N., Gibson R., Cantijoch M., Wlezien Ch. (eds). The Routledge handbook of elections, voting behavior and public opinion. New York: Routledge, 2018, P. 21–29.

26. Jennings M.K., Stoker L., Bowers J. Politics across generations: Family transmission reexamined. The journal of politics. 2009, Vol. 71, N 3, P. 782–799. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022381609090719

27. Johnston R., Pattie Ch. Putting voters in their place: geography and elections in Great Britain. Oxford: Oxford university press, 2006, 336 p.

28. Johnston R.J., Pattie C., Hartman T. Who follows the leader? Leadership heuristics and valence voting at the UK’s 2016 Brexit referendum. Innovation: The European journal of social science research. 2021, Vol. 34, N 1, P. 28–43.

29. Jones M.I., Sirianni A.D., Fu F. Polarization, abstention, and the median voter theorem. Humanities and social sciences communications. 2022, Vol. 9, P. 1–12. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-022-01056-0

30. Key V.O. Southern politics in state and nation. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1949, 675 p.

31. Kolosov V.A., Borodulina N.A. Electoral preferences of voters in large Russian cities: types and stability. Polis. Political studies. 2004, N 4, P. 70–79. (In Russ.)

32. Korgunyuk Yu.G. Cleavage theory and quantitative methods in political science. Political science (RU). 2023, N 4, P. 95–126. DOI: http://www.doi.org/10.31249/poln/2023.04.04 (In Russ.).

33. Krehbiel E. Geographic influences in British elections. Geographical review. 1916, Vol. 2, N 6, P. 419–432.

34. Kuklinski J.H., West D.M. Economic expectations and voting behavior in United States Senate and House elections. American political science review. 1981, Vol. 75, P. 436–447.

35. Lazarsfeld P.F., Berelson B., Gaudet H. The people’s choice: how the voter makes up his mind in a presidential campaign. New York: Duell, Sloan and Pearce, 1944, 224 p.

36. Linke A., O'Loughlin J. Spatial analysis. In: Agnew J., Mamadouh V., Secor A., Sharp J. (eds). The Wiley Blackwell companion to political geography. West Sussex: Wiley-Blackwell, 2017, P. 187–205.

37. Lipset S.M. Political man. New York: Anchor books, 1960, 477 p.

38. O'Loughlin J. Spatial analysis in political geography. In: Agnew J., Mitchell K., Toal G. (eds). A companion to political geography. Oxford: Blackwell, 2003, P. 30–46.

39. Palfrey T., Rosenthal H. Voter participation and strategic uncertainty. American political science review. 1985, Vol. 79, N 1, P. 62–78.

40. Panov P.V. The specificity of capital cities in the electoral landscape of Russian regions: variability in the framework of the «center-periphery» disposition. Political science (RU). 2024, N 4, P. 76–97. DOI: http://www.doi.org/10.31249/poln/2024.01.03 (In Russ.)

41. Pelling H. Social geography of British elections 1885–1910. London: Palgrave Macmillan, 1967, 486 p.

42. Popkin S.L. Reasoning voter: communication and persuasion in presidential campaigns. Chicago: Chicago university press, 1991, 291 p.

43. Siegfried A. The Tableau politique de la France de l'Ouest sous la Troisième République. Paris: A. Colin, 1913, 535 p. (In French)

44. Tambovtsev V.L. Unproductivity of the methodological fusion`s attempts. Issues of economic theory. 2020, N 3, P. 7–31. DOI: http://www.doi.org/10.24411/2587-7666-2020-10301 (In Russ.)

45. Tingsten H. Political behavior; Studies in election statistics. London: P.S. King and Son, 1937, 231 p.

46. Turovsky R.F. Regional dimension of the electoral process: conceptual foundations of research. Social sciences and modernity. 2006, N 5, P. 5–19. (In Russ.)

47. Turovsky R.F., Gaivoronsky Yu.O. The impact of the economy on electoral behavior in Russia: Does the «contract» between the government and society work? Politeia. 2017, N 3, 42–61. (In Russ.)

48. Udehn L. The changing face of methodological individualism. Annual review of sociology. 2002, Vol. 28, P. 479–507. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.28.110601.140938

49. Usmanov R.Kh., Grishin N.V., Oskina O.I., Kudryashova E.V. Development of political science in the Astrakhan region. Caspian region: politics, economics, culture. 2014, N 1, P. 208–217. (In Russ.)

50. Walks R. Place of residence, party preferences, and political attitudes in Canadian cities and suburbs. Journal of urban affairs. 2004, Vol. 26, N 3, P. 269–295.

51. Zahle J. Introduction. In: Zahle J., Collin F. (eds). Rethinking the individualism-holism debate. Essays in the philosophy of social science. Dordrecht: Synthese library springer, 2014, P. 1–14.

52. Zolnerkevic A. Contexto social de vizinhança: percepções políticas na cidade de São Paulo. Revista Brasileira de Ciência Política. 2019, N 29, P. 189–222. (In Portuguese)