Election predictions: Reply

Abstract

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

Download options

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 72,891

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-30

Downloads
17 (#642,616)

6 months
1 (#386,040)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work

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

Add more citations