Incumbent advantage reflects voter risk aversion in gains while challengers benefit in losses

Evidence

The results showed that the assumptions underlying the classical theory of risky choice are systematically violated in the manner predicted by prospect theory. In particular, our respondents exhibited risk aversion in the domain of gains, risk seeking in the domain of losses, and a greater sensitivity to losses than to gains. This is consistent with the advantage of the incumbent under normal conditions and the potential advantage of the challenger in bad times. The results further show how a shift in the reference point could lead to reversals of preferences in the evaluation of political and economic options, contrary to the assumption of invariance. — John T. Jost and Jim Sidanius, Political Psychology, 2406

Categorization

• XREF: Connects to the reader’s interest in evolutionary psychology of threat/loss responses and to behavioral economics framing effects. — connects to: Public choice theory explains election-driven booms and slumps as vote maximization — Mark Blyth, Austerity: The History of a Dangerous…, 415; Incumbency-oriented voting results from risk asymmetry, not merely punishment. — John T. Jost and Jim Sidanius, Political Psychology: Key Readings, 2440; Risky challengers win bad-time votes despite equal expected value. — John T. Jost and Jim Sidanius, Political Psychology: Key Readings, 2441
• SEED: Angle: incumbency advantage in elections as a cognitive framing effect, not just structural advantage — reframe electoral punditry around prospect theory.