The Activists Who Divide Us: A Cross-Country Analysis of Party Activists’ Influence on Polarization and Representation

IF 4.2 1区 社会学 Q1 POLITICAL SCIENCE Comparative Political Studies Pub Date : 2023-05-20 DOI:10.1177/00104140231169030
Yair Amitai
{"title":"The Activists Who Divide Us: A Cross-Country Analysis of Party Activists’ Influence on Polarization and Representation","authors":"Yair Amitai","doi":"10.1177/00104140231169030","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"What explains party polarization in multiparty systems? This study turns the spotlight to intraparty mechanisms, namely, the authorities and influence of party activists over the candidate selection process, as a potential source of party-system polarization. I hypothesize that parties in which activists possess more comprehensive selection authorities, the party elite will hold more extreme ideological positions, catering to activists' representation demands. Additionally, in such cases, the ideological gap between party elites and voters will be larger since more extreme actors overshadow the preferences of moderate party voters. Aggregating the intraparty effect of activists to the party-system level, I expect to find higher level of party polarization in countries where more parties allocate selection authorities to activists. Utilizing party-level data regarding candidate selection procedures as well as public opinion and elite position data from 19 countries and 93 parties between 2011 and 2017, I find support for my hypotheses.","PeriodicalId":10600,"journal":{"name":"Comparative Political Studies","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Comparative Political Studies","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00104140231169030","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

What explains party polarization in multiparty systems? This study turns the spotlight to intraparty mechanisms, namely, the authorities and influence of party activists over the candidate selection process, as a potential source of party-system polarization. I hypothesize that parties in which activists possess more comprehensive selection authorities, the party elite will hold more extreme ideological positions, catering to activists' representation demands. Additionally, in such cases, the ideological gap between party elites and voters will be larger since more extreme actors overshadow the preferences of moderate party voters. Aggregating the intraparty effect of activists to the party-system level, I expect to find higher level of party polarization in countries where more parties allocate selection authorities to activists. Utilizing party-level data regarding candidate selection procedures as well as public opinion and elite position data from 19 countries and 93 parties between 2011 and 2017, I find support for my hypotheses.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
分裂我们的激进主义者:政党激进主义对两极分化和代表性影响的跨国分析
是什么解释了多党制中的政党两极分化?这项研究将焦点转向党内机制,即党内活动家对候选人选拔过程的权威和影响力,这是政党制度两极分化的潜在来源。我假设,在积极分子拥有更全面选拔权的政党中,政党精英将持有更极端的意识形态立场,以满足积极分子的代表性要求。此外,在这种情况下,政党精英和选民之间的意识形态差距将更大,因为更极端的行为者掩盖了温和派政党选民的偏好。将活动家的党内效应聚合到政党系统层面,我预计在更多政党将选拔权分配给活动家的国家,会发现政党两极分化程度更高。利用2011年至2017年间来自19个国家和93个政党的关于候选人选拔程序的党内数据以及民意和精英职位数据,我发现我的假设得到了支持。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Comparative Political Studies
Comparative Political Studies POLITICAL SCIENCE-
CiteScore
8.40
自引率
4.00%
发文量
69
期刊介绍: Comparative Political Studies is a journal of social and political science which publishes scholarly work on comparative politics at both the cross-national and intra-national levels. We are particularly interested in articles which have an innovative theoretical argument and are based on sound and original empirical research. We also encourage submissions about comparative methodology, particularly when methodological arguments are closely linked with substantive issues in the field.
期刊最新文献
How Moral Beliefs Influence Collective Violence. Evidence From Lynching in Mexico. The Legacies of Rebel Rule in Southeast Turkey Does Election Fraud Erode Support for Autocrats? Corrigendum to the Human Costs of the War on Drugs. Attitudes Towards Militarization of Security in Mexico Purging to Transform the Post-Colonial State: Evidence From the 1952 Egyptian Revolution
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1