BawnKThiesMF (2003) A comparative theory of electoral incentives: Representing the unorganized under PR, plurality and mixed-member electoral systems. Journal of Theoretical Politics15(1): 5–32.
2.
BuisseretPPratoC (2020) Voting behavior under proportional representation. Journal of Theoretical Politics32(1): 96–111.
3.
CareyJMShugartMS (1995) Incentives to cultivate a personal vote: A rank ordering of electoral formulas. Electoral studies14(4): 417–439.
4.
CarrollRNalepaM (2020) The personal vote and party cohesion: Modeling the effects of electoral rules on intraparty politics. Journal of Theoretical Politics32(1): 36–69.
5.
ChangECC (2005) Electoral incentives for political corruption under open-list proportional representation. The Journal of Politics67(3): 716–730.
6.
CheibubJASinG (2020) Preference vote and intra-party competition in open list PR systems. Journal of Theoretical Politics32(1): 70–95.
7.
DesposatoSW (2006) Parties for rent? Ambition, ideology, and party switching in Brazil’s chamber of deputies. American Journal of Political Science50(1): 62–80.
8.
FigueiredoALimongiF (2000) Presidential power, legislative organization, and party behavior in Brazil. Comparative Politics32(2): 151–170.
9.
FolkeOPerssonTRickneJ (2016) The primary effect: Preference votes and political promotions. American Political Science Review110(3): 559–578.
10.
FolkeORickneJ (2020) Preference votes: Accountability at the price of cohesion?Journal of Theoretical Politics32(1): 11–35.
11.
GingerichDW (2009) Ballot structure, political corruption, and the performance of proportional representation. Journal of Theoretical Politics21(4): 509–541.
12.
HallerbergMMarierP (2004) Executive authority, the personal vote and budget discipline in Latin American and Caribbean countries. American Journal of Political Science48(3): 571–58.
13.
HickenA (2007) How do rules and institutions encourage vote buying? In: SchafferFC (ed) Elections for Sale: The Causes and Consequences of Vote-Buying. Boulder: Lynne Rienner, pp. 47–60.
14.
HickenASimmonsJ W (2008) The personal vote and the efficacy of education spending. American Journal of Political Science52(1): 109–124.
15.
KselmanD (2020) Public goods equilibria under closed- and open-list proportional representation. Journal of Theoretical Politics32(1): 112–142.
16.
KunicováJRose-AckermanS (2005) Electoral rules and constitutional structures as constraints on corruption. British Journal of Political Science35(4): 573–606.
17.
LizzeriAPersicoN (2001) The provision of public goods under alternative electoral incentives. American Economic Review91(1): 225–245.
18.
MershonC (2020) Challenging the wisdom on preferential proportional representation. Journal of Theoretical Politics32(1): 168–182.
19.
Milesi-FerrettiG-MPerottiRRostagnoM (2002) Electoral systems and public spending. Quarterly Journal of Economics117(2): 609–657.
20.
MustilloTPolga-HecimovichJ (2020) Party, candidate, and voter incentives under free list proportional representation. Journal of Theoretical Politics32(1): 143–167.
21.
PerssonTTabelliniG (2000). Political Economics: Explaining Economic Policy. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
22.
PerssonTTabelliniG (2004) Constitutional rules and fiscal policy outcomes. American Economic Review94(1): 25–45.
23.
PerssonTTabelliniGTrebbiF (2003) Electoral rules and corruption. Journal of the European Economic Association1(4): 958–989.
24.
SerraG (2011) Why primaries? The party’s tradeoff between policy and valence. Journal of Theoretical Politics23(1): 21–51.
25.
SiebererU (2006) Party unity in parliamentary democracies: A comparative analysis. The Journal of Legislative Studies12(2): 150–178.