Electoral outcomes and support for Westminster democracy

IF 1.6 3区 社会学 Q2 POLITICAL SCIENCE Journal of Elections Public Opinion and Parties Pub Date : 2021-06-28 DOI:10.1080/17457289.2021.1946546
Hannah M. Ridge
{"title":"Electoral outcomes and support for Westminster democracy","authors":"Hannah M. Ridge","doi":"10.1080/17457289.2021.1946546","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT It is well established that those who supported the winning side in elections report greater specific democratic support – they are more satisfied with the functioning of their democracy – than those who supported the losing side. This literature, however, has focused almost exclusively on winning the presidency or premiership. This project extends that literature to incorporate the effect of district election victories and defeats on citizens’ democratic opinions using post-election surveys in three Westminster-style democracies: Australia, Canada, and Great Britain. It also includes two indicators of democratic institutional support: believing it matters for whom people vote and believing it matters who is in power. It finds that district-level results moderate the win-loss satisfaction gap induced by national election results. Winning in the constituency offsets the negative effect of electoral defeat; among national winners, however, the district result has limited impact on democratic attitudes. Constituency-level victories are less effective at mitigating the effect of national defeat on more diffuse democracy support.","PeriodicalId":46791,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Elections Public Opinion and Parties","volume":"111 1","pages":"887 - 906"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2021-06-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"8","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Elections Public Opinion and Parties","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17457289.2021.1946546","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 8

Abstract

ABSTRACT It is well established that those who supported the winning side in elections report greater specific democratic support – they are more satisfied with the functioning of their democracy – than those who supported the losing side. This literature, however, has focused almost exclusively on winning the presidency or premiership. This project extends that literature to incorporate the effect of district election victories and defeats on citizens’ democratic opinions using post-election surveys in three Westminster-style democracies: Australia, Canada, and Great Britain. It also includes two indicators of democratic institutional support: believing it matters for whom people vote and believing it matters who is in power. It finds that district-level results moderate the win-loss satisfaction gap induced by national election results. Winning in the constituency offsets the negative effect of electoral defeat; among national winners, however, the district result has limited impact on democratic attitudes. Constituency-level victories are less effective at mitigating the effect of national defeat on more diffuse democracy support.
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
选举结果和对威斯敏斯特民主的支持
众所周知,在选举中支持获胜一方的人比支持失败一方的人对民主的具体支持更大——他们对民主的运作更满意。然而,这些文献几乎完全集中在赢得总统或首相职位上。本项目通过对三个威斯敏斯特式民主国家(澳大利亚、加拿大和英国)的选后调查,将地区选举的胜利和失败对公民民主意见的影响纳入文献。它还包括民主制度支持的两个指标:相信人民投票对谁很重要,相信谁掌权很重要。研究发现,地区层面的结果缓和了由全国选举结果引起的输赢满意度差距。选区的胜利抵消了选举失败的负面影响;然而,在全国的获胜者中,地区选举结果对民主态度的影响有限。选区层面的胜利在减轻全国性失败对更广泛的民主支持的影响方面效果较差。
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
CiteScore
4.00
自引率
5.60%
发文量
21
期刊最新文献
Have heads cooled? Changes in radical partisanship from 2020–2022 Only losers use excuses? Exploring the association between the winner-loser gap and referendum attitudes following a local referendum The effect of signing ballot petitions on turnout Determinants of swing voting in Africa: evidence from Ghana's elections Issue salience and affective polarization
×
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:604180095
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