| 1. |
- Dahlberg, Stefan, 1975, et al.
(author)
-
Left-Right Ideology as an Inferential Device in Multiparty Systems: Can Citizens Overcome Low Information by Imputing Parties' Policy Positions?
- 2016
-
In: Electoral Studies. - : Elsevier BV. - 0261-3794. ; 42, s. 175-187
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- This study examines the extent to which knowledge about parties' ideological Left–Right positions can be used schematically by voters to impute these parties' stances on specific policy issues. Can Left–Right familiarity help citizens, whose knowledge of political and societal issues is often limited, to overcome the low information problem? Based on two Swedish panel studies, we show that - in contrast to the American two-party context – the least knowledgeable voters benefit most from using inferences based on parties' Left–Right locations. The effectiveness of schema-based deduction is thus dependent on its place within a given political culture. In the Swedish multiparty context, the Left–Right dimension is meaningful for most voters, and can be used schematically to partly alleviate a lack of knowledge.
|
|
| 2. |
- Harteveld, Eelco, et al.
(author)
-
A tough trade-off? : The asymmetrical impact of populist radical right inclusion on satisfaction with democracy and government
- 2021
-
In: European Political Science Review. - 1755-7739 .- 1755-7747. ; 13:1, s. 113-133
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Abstarct Populist radical right (PRR) parties are increasingly included in coalition governments across Western Europe. How does such inclusion affect satisfaction with democracy (SWD) in these societies? While some citizens will feel democracy has grown more responsive, others will abhor the inclusion of such controversial parties. Using data from the European Social Survey (2002-2018) and panel data from the Netherlands, we investigate how nativists' and non-nativists' SWD depends on mainstream parties' strategies towards PRR parties. We show that the effect is asymmetrical: at moments of inclusion nativists become substantially more satisfied with democracy, while such satisfaction among non-nativists decreases less or not at all. This pattern, which we attribute to Easton's 'reservoir of goodwill', that is, a buffer of political support generated by a track-record of good performance and responsiveness, can account for the seemingly contradictory increase in SWD in many Western European countries in times of populism.
|
|
| 3. |
- Harteveld, Eelco, et al.
(author)
-
The gender gap in populist radical-right voting: Examining the demand side in Western and Eastern Europe
- 2015
-
In: Patterns of Prejudice. - 0031-322X .- 1461-7331. ; 49:1-2, s. 103-134
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- In most countries, men are more likely to vote for parties of the populist radical right (PRR) than women. The authors argue here that there are two mechanisms that might potentially explain this gender gap: mediation (women’s attitudes and characteristics differ from men’s in ways that explain the PRR vote) and moderation (women vote for different reasons than men). They apply these two mechanisms to general theories of support for PRR parties—the socio-structural model, the discontent model, and the policy vote model—and test these on a large sample of voters in seventeen Western and Eastern European countries. The study shows that the gender gap is produced by a combination of moderation and mediation. Socio-structural differences between men and women exist, but the extent to which they explain the gender gap is limited, and primarily restricted to post- Communist countries. Furthermore, women generally do not differ from men in their level of nativism, authoritarianism or discontent with democracy. Among women, however, these attitudes are less strongly related to a radical-right vote. This suggests that men consider the issues of the radical right to be more salient, but also that these parties deter women for reasons other than the content of their political programme. While the existing research has focused almost exclusively on mediation, we show that moderation and mediation contribute almost equally to the gender gap. © 2015 Taylor & Francis.
|
|
