Voter satisfaction and electoral systems: Does preferential voting in candidate-centred systems make a difference?

European Journal of Political Research

Volumn 45, Issue 5, 2006, Pages 723-749

  Farrell, David M ^a,c   Mcallister, Ian ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MANCHESTER   (United Kingdom)

^b AUSTRALIAN NATIONAL UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

^c UNIVERSITY OF MANCHESTER   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 33747331940     PISSN: 03044130     EISSN: 14756765     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1475-6765.2006.00633.x     Document Type: Article

References (53)

1. Ames, B. (1995). Electoral strategy under open-list proportional representation. American Journal of Political Science 39: 406-433.
2. Anderson, C. & Guillory, C. (1997). Political institutions and satisfaction with democracy: A cross-national analysis of consensus and majoritarian systems. American Political Science Review 91: 66-81.
3. Bowler, S. (1986). Reasoning voters, voter behaviour and institutions: The decision dependence of voting behaviour. In D. Farrell et al. (eds), British elections and parties yearbook, 1996. London: Frank Cass.
4. Bowler, S. & Farrell, D. (1993). Legislator shirking and voter monitoring: Impacts of European Parliament electoral systems upon legislator-voter relationships. Journal of Common Market Studies 31: 45-69.
5. Bowler, S. & Grofman, B. (eds) (2000). Elections in Australia, Ireland and Malta under the single transferable vote: Reflections on an embedded institution. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
6. Bowler, S., Carter, E. & Farrell, D. (2003). Changing party access to elections. In B. Cain, R. Dalton & S. Scarrow (eds), Democracy transformed? Expanding political opportunities in advanced industrial democracies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
7. Bowler, S. et al. (2002). Electoral reform and minority representation: Local experiments with alternative elections. Columbus, OH: Ohio State University Press.
8. Cannache, D., Mondak, J.J. & Seligson, M.A. (2001). Meaning and measurement in cross-national research on satisfaction with democracy. Public Opinion Quarterly 65: 506-28.
9. Carey, J. & Shugart, M. (1995). Incentives to cultivate a personal vote: A rank ordering of electoral formulas. Electoral Studies 14: 417-439.
10. Castles, F.G. (1994). The policy consequences of proportional representation: A sceptical commentary. Political Science 46:161-171.
11. Cox, G. (1990). Centripetal and centrifugal incentives in electoral systems. American Journal of Political Science 34: 903-935.
12. Curtice, J. & Shively, W.P. (n.d.). Who represents us best? One member or many? (mimeo).
13. Easton, D. (1965). A framework for political analysis. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall
14. Farrell, B. (1985). Ireland: From friends and neighbours to clients and partisans: Some dimensions of parliamentary representation under PR-STV. In V. Bogdanor (ed.), Representatives of the people? Aldershot: Gower.
15. Farrell, D. (2001). Electoral systems. London: Macmillan Palgrave.
16. Farrell, D. & Scully, R. (2003). Electoral reform and the British MEP. Journal of Legislative Studies 9:14-37.
17. Farrell, D. & McAllister, I. (2005). Australia's electoral systems. Sydney: University of New South Wales Press.
18. Grofman, B. et al. (eds) (1999). Elections in Japan, Korea and Taiwan under the single non-transferable vote: The comparative study of an embedded institution. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
19. Hallett, G. (1984). Proportional representation with the single transferable vote: A basic requirement for legislative elections. In A. Lijphart & B. Grofman (eds), Choosing an electoral system: Issues and alternatives. Westport, CT: Praeger.
20. Horowitz, D. (1991). A democratic South Africa? Constitutional engineering in a divided society. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
21. Karp, J. & Banducci, S.A. (2004). Political Efficacy and Participation in Twenty-five Democracies: How Electoral Systems Shape Political Behavior. Unpublished paper.
22. Karp, J., Banducci, S. & Bowler, S. (2003). To know it is to love it? Satisfaction with democracy in the European Union. Comparative Political Studies 36: 271-292.
23. Katz, R. (1980). A theory of parties and electoral systems. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
24. Katz, R. (1997a). Representational roles. European Journal of Political Research 32: 211-226.
25. Katz, R. (1997b). Democracy and elections. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
26. Lakeman, E. (1974). How democracies vote: A study of majority and proportional electoral systems (4th edn). London: Faber & Faber.
27. Lawson, K. (ed.) (1980). Political parties and linkage: A comparative perspective. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
28. Lijphart, A. (1994). Electoral systems and party systems: A study of twenty-seven democracies, 1945-1990. New York: Oxford University Press.
29. Lijphart, A. (1999). Patterns of democracy: Government forms and performance in thirty-six countries. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
30. Linde, J. & Ekman, J. (2003). Satisfaction with democracy: A note on a frequently used indicator in comparative politics. European Journal of Political Research 42: 391-408.
31. Lipset, S.M. (1966). Political man. London: Mercury Books.
32. Marsh M. (2000). Candidate centered but party wrapped: Campaigning in Ireland under STV. In S. Bowler & B. Grofman (eds), Elections in Australia, Ireland and Malta under the single transferable vote: Reflections on an embedded institution. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
33. McLean, I. (1991). Forms of representation and systems of voting. In D. Held (ed.), Political theory today. Cambridge: Polity Press.
34. Mitchell, P. (2000). Voters and their representatives: Electoral institutions and delegation in parliamentary democracies. European Journal of Political Research 37: 335-351.
35. Norris, P. (1999). Institutional explanations for political support. In Critical citizens: Global support for democratic governance. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
36. Norris, P. (2004). Electoral engineering: Voting rules and electoral behavior. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
37. Rae, D. (1967). The political consequences of electoral laws. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
38. Reilly, B. (2001). Democracy in divided societies: Electoral engineering for conflict management. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
39. Reynolds, A. (1999). Electoral systems and democratization in Southern Africa. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
40. Reynolds, A. (ed.) (2002). The architecture of democracy: Constitutional design, conflict management and democracy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
41. Römmele, A., Farrell, D. & Ignazi, P. (eds) (2005). Political parties and political systems: The concept of linkage revisited. Westport, CT: Greenwood/Praeger.
42. Rose, R. (1992). What are the economic consequences of PR? London: Electoral Reform Society.
43. Rose, R. (ed.) (2000). International encyclopedia of elections. London: Macmillan Palgrave.
44. Sartori, G. (1968). Political development and political engineering. Public Policy 17:261-298.
45. Sartori, G. (1976). Parties and party systems: A framework for analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
46. Sartori, G. (1997). Comparative constitutional engineering: An inquiry into structures, incentives and outcomes (2nd edn). London: Macmillan.
47. Shugart, M. (2001). Electoral 'efficiency' and the move to mixed-member systems. Electoral Studies 20:173-193.
48. Shugart, M. & Wattenberg, M. (eds) (2001). Mixed-member electoral systems: The best of both worlds? Oxford: Oxford University Press.
49. Sisk, T. (1995). Democratization in South Africa: The elusive social contract. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
50. Taagepera, R. (2002). Designing electoral rules and waiting for an electoral system to evolve. In A. Reynolds (ed.), The architecture of democracy: Constitutional design, conflict management and democracy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
51. Taagepera, R. & Shugart, M. (1989). Seats and votes: The effects and determinants of electoral systems. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
52. Thomassen, J. & Kolk, H. van der. (forthcoming). Economic performance and satisfaction with democracy. In H.-D. Klingemann (ed.), A comparative study of electoral systems. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
53. Weaver, R.K. & Rockman, B.A. (eds) (1993). Do institutions matter? Government capabilities in the United States and abroad. Washington, DC; Brookings Institution.