记录投票作为注意力的助推器:2017-21年德国联邦议院中反对党如何利用点名和无记录投票来表明立场

IF 1.4 3区 社会学 Q2 POLITICAL SCIENCE Legislative Studies Quarterly Pub Date : 2023-12-10 DOI:10.1111/lsq.12442
Lukas Hohendorf, Ulrich Sieberer, Jonas Wenzig
{"title":"记录投票作为注意力的助推器:2017-21年德国联邦议院中反对党如何利用点名和无记录投票来表明立场","authors":"Lukas Hohendorf,&nbsp;Ulrich Sieberer,&nbsp;Jonas Wenzig","doi":"10.1111/lsq.12442","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>The article investigates roll-call request and its effects on opposition-voting behavior. It argues that parties use roll-call votes (RCVs) as a position-taking instrument to boost public attention for issues they care about. This argument implies that RCVs are requested strategically but opposition behavior should not differ systematically between recorded and nonrecorded votes. Studying all voting activities of the 19th German Bundestag (2017–21), the analysis shows that RCVs are more likely on high-salience issues, more important motion types, and to some extent opposition motions. Voting conforms to the position-taking model as opposition parties are less likely to vote with the government on their own motions and more important motion types. However, opposition behavior does not differ systematically between recorded and nonrecorded votes suggesting that parties act consistently across all votes. Thus, RCVs provide valid measures for studying interparty competition in parliament despite their selective sampling properties.</p>","PeriodicalId":47672,"journal":{"name":"Legislative Studies Quarterly","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/lsq.12442","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Recorded Votes as Attention Booster: How Opposition Parties use Roll Calls and Nonrecorded Votes for Position Taking in the German Bundestag, 2017–21\",\"authors\":\"Lukas Hohendorf,&nbsp;Ulrich Sieberer,&nbsp;Jonas Wenzig\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/lsq.12442\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>The article investigates roll-call request and its effects on opposition-voting behavior. It argues that parties use roll-call votes (RCVs) as a position-taking instrument to boost public attention for issues they care about. This argument implies that RCVs are requested strategically but opposition behavior should not differ systematically between recorded and nonrecorded votes. Studying all voting activities of the 19th German Bundestag (2017–21), the analysis shows that RCVs are more likely on high-salience issues, more important motion types, and to some extent opposition motions. Voting conforms to the position-taking model as opposition parties are less likely to vote with the government on their own motions and more important motion types. However, opposition behavior does not differ systematically between recorded and nonrecorded votes suggesting that parties act consistently across all votes. Thus, RCVs provide valid measures for studying interparty competition in parliament despite their selective sampling properties.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47672,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Legislative Studies Quarterly\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-12-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/lsq.12442\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Legislative Studies Quarterly\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/lsq.12442\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"POLITICAL SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Legislative Studies Quarterly","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/lsq.12442","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: 0

摘要

本文研究了点名要求及其对反对投票行为的影响。它认为,政党使用唱名投票(RCVs)作为一种表明立场的工具,以提高公众对他们关心的问题的关注。这一论点意味着rcv是战略上的要求,但反对派的行为不应该在记录投票和非记录投票之间有系统的差异。研究了第19届德国联邦议院(2017-21)的所有投票活动,分析表明,rcv更有可能针对高度突出的问题、更重要的动议类型,以及在某种程度上的反对动议。投票符合立场模型,因为反对党不太可能在自己的动议和更重要的动议类型上与政府一起投票。然而,反对党的行为在记录投票和非记录投票之间并没有系统差异,这表明各方在所有投票中行为一致。因此,尽管rcv具有选择性抽样特性,但它为研究议会中的党派间竞争提供了有效的措施。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

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
Recorded Votes as Attention Booster: How Opposition Parties use Roll Calls and Nonrecorded Votes for Position Taking in the German Bundestag, 2017–21

The article investigates roll-call request and its effects on opposition-voting behavior. It argues that parties use roll-call votes (RCVs) as a position-taking instrument to boost public attention for issues they care about. This argument implies that RCVs are requested strategically but opposition behavior should not differ systematically between recorded and nonrecorded votes. Studying all voting activities of the 19th German Bundestag (2017–21), the analysis shows that RCVs are more likely on high-salience issues, more important motion types, and to some extent opposition motions. Voting conforms to the position-taking model as opposition parties are less likely to vote with the government on their own motions and more important motion types. However, opposition behavior does not differ systematically between recorded and nonrecorded votes suggesting that parties act consistently across all votes. Thus, RCVs provide valid measures for studying interparty competition in parliament despite their selective sampling properties.

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
Legislative Studies Quarterly
Legislative Studies Quarterly POLITICAL SCIENCE-
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
13.30%
发文量
36
期刊介绍: The Legislative Studies Quarterly is an international journal devoted to the publication of research on representative assemblies. Its purpose is to disseminate scholarly work on parliaments and legislatures, their relations to other political institutions, their functions in the political system, and the activities of their members both within the institution and outside. Contributions are invited from scholars in all countries. The pages of the Quarterly are open to all research approaches consistent with the normal canons of scholarship, and to work on representative assemblies in all settings and all time periods. The aim of the journal is to contribute to the formulation and verification of general theories about legislative systems, processes, and behavior.
期刊最新文献
Issue Information About the Authors Personality and political representation—How personality traits shape MPs' attitudes toward gender equality The role of politicians' perceptual accuracy of voter opinions in their electoral career Who works with whom? Collaboration ties in legislative policy‐making networks
×
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