Menu Adam R Brown

Notes navigation: Browse by titleBrowse by authorSubject index

McAdams and Johannes: Does casework matter

Disclaimer. Don't rely on these old notes in lieu of reading the literature, but they can jog your memory. As a grad student long ago, my peers and I collaborated to write and exchange summaries of political science research. I posted them to a wiki-style website. "Wikisum" is now dead but archived here. I cannot vouch for these notes' accuracy, nor can I even say who wrote them. If you have more recent summaries to add to this collection, send them my way I guess. Sorry for the ads; they cover the costs of keeping this online.

McAdams and Johannes. 1981. Does casework matter? A reply to Professor Fiorina. AJPS 25:581-604.

In Brief

The authors respond strongly to each of Fiorina's (1981) critiques of their earlier argument (Johannes and McAdams 1981), taking Fiorina's point item-by-item. They reiterate their original claim--that casework provides little electoral benefit to members of Congress (MCs)--and argue in defense of their methods.

Place in the Literature

Mayhew (1974) raised the puzzle of the vanishing marginals. Fiorina (1977) suggested that casework was to blame ("the bureaucracy did it"). Johannes and McAdams (1981) challenged this claim, eliciting Fiorina's (1981) rapid reply. This article is McAdams and Johannes's response to Fiorina's reply.

To read notes on this article, see the summary of Fiorina 1981; M&J's responses follow each of Fiorina's points.

Research by the same authors

Research on similar subjects

Tags

McAdams, John (author)Johannes, John (author)Political ScienceElectionsIncumbency AdvantageCongress (U.S.)CongressElectoral Connection

Wikisum home: Index of all summaries by title, by author, or by subject.