弱制度化民主国家的总统辩论和选举偏好:来自32次拉丁美洲选举的证据

IF 1.6 Q2 POLITICAL SCIENCE Journal of Politics in Latin America Pub Date : 2023-11-13 DOI:10.1177/1866802x231213668
Francisco Cantú, Miguel Carreras
{"title":"弱制度化民主国家的总统辩论和选举偏好:来自32次拉丁美洲选举的证据","authors":"Francisco Cantú, Miguel Carreras","doi":"10.1177/1866802x231213668","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Previous research has shown that presidential debates have “minimal effects” on aggregate electoral preferences because they mainly reinforce people's pre-existing political preferences. However, most of what we know about the behavioural effects of debates comes from research conducted in the United States and other institutionalised democracies. We re-evaluate the effects of debates on electoral preferences by focusing on Latin American elections. Given higher levels of electoral volatility, weaker partisan brands, lower partisanship, and more personalised voter linkages, we expect that debates play a significant role in shaping vote choice in Latin America. We test these expectations by conducting an analysis of presidential debates on aggregated vote preferences in thirty-two elections across fourteen Latin American countries from 2002 to 2019. Our results show that presidential debates shape electoral preferences in countries with weakly institutionalised party systems.","PeriodicalId":44885,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Politics in Latin America","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Presidential Debates and Electoral Preferences in Weakly Institutionalised Democracies: Evidence From 32 Latin American Elections\",\"authors\":\"Francisco Cantú, Miguel Carreras\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/1866802x231213668\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Previous research has shown that presidential debates have “minimal effects” on aggregate electoral preferences because they mainly reinforce people's pre-existing political preferences. However, most of what we know about the behavioural effects of debates comes from research conducted in the United States and other institutionalised democracies. We re-evaluate the effects of debates on electoral preferences by focusing on Latin American elections. Given higher levels of electoral volatility, weaker partisan brands, lower partisanship, and more personalised voter linkages, we expect that debates play a significant role in shaping vote choice in Latin America. We test these expectations by conducting an analysis of presidential debates on aggregated vote preferences in thirty-two elections across fourteen Latin American countries from 2002 to 2019. Our results show that presidential debates shape electoral preferences in countries with weakly institutionalised party systems.\",\"PeriodicalId\":44885,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Politics in Latin America\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-11-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Politics in Latin America\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/1866802x231213668\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"POLITICAL SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Politics in Latin America","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1866802x231213668","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

先前的研究表明,总统辩论对总体选举偏好的影响“微乎其微”,因为它们主要是强化人们已有的政治偏好。然而,我们对辩论的行为影响的了解大多来自于在美国和其他制度化的民主国家进行的研究。我们通过关注拉丁美洲的选举,重新评估辩论对选举偏好的影响。鉴于拉丁美洲选举的波动性较高,党派品牌较弱,党派关系较低,选民联系更加个性化,我们预计辩论在塑造投票选择方面将发挥重要作用。我们通过对2002年至2019年14个拉丁美洲国家32次选举中关于总投票偏好的总统辩论进行分析来检验这些预期。我们的研究结果表明,在政党制度制度化较弱的国家,总统辩论会影响选举偏好。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Presidential Debates and Electoral Preferences in Weakly Institutionalised Democracies: Evidence From 32 Latin American Elections
Previous research has shown that presidential debates have “minimal effects” on aggregate electoral preferences because they mainly reinforce people's pre-existing political preferences. However, most of what we know about the behavioural effects of debates comes from research conducted in the United States and other institutionalised democracies. We re-evaluate the effects of debates on electoral preferences by focusing on Latin American elections. Given higher levels of electoral volatility, weaker partisan brands, lower partisanship, and more personalised voter linkages, we expect that debates play a significant role in shaping vote choice in Latin America. We test these expectations by conducting an analysis of presidential debates on aggregated vote preferences in thirty-two elections across fourteen Latin American countries from 2002 to 2019. Our results show that presidential debates shape electoral preferences in countries with weakly institutionalised party systems.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
13
审稿时长
8 weeks
期刊最新文献
Why Are Constitutional Amendments in Mexico so Frequent? Assessing Electoral Personalism in Latin American Presidential Elections Where did Hyper-Presidentialism Go? The Origin of Bills and Laws Passed in Chile, 1990–2022 Assessing the Relationship Between Compulsory Voting and Over-Representation of Extreme Parties Do Disciplinary Sanctions Affect Political Parties’ Re-election? Evidence from Colombia
×
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