Valence beyond consensus: Party competence and policy dispersion from a comparative perspective

Electoral Studies

Volumn 31, Issue 2, 2012, Pages 342-352

  Pardos Prado, Sergi ^a  

^a NUFFIELD COLLEGE   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Hierarchical modelling; Ideological consensus; Party competence; Spatial voting; Valence

Indexed keywords

COMPARATIVE STUDY; ELECTORAL SYSTEM; PARTY POLITICS; POLICY IMPLEMENTATION; POLITICAL IDEOLOGY; THEORETICAL STUDY;

EID: 84861703940     PISSN: 02613794     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.electstud.2012.01.004     Document Type: Article

References (77)

1. Aardal B., van Wijnen P. Issue voting. The European Voter: A Comparative Study of Modern Democracies 2005, Oxford University Press/ECPR, Oxford. J. Thomassen, (Ed.).
2. Abney, R., et al., forthcoming. When Does Valence Matter? On Heightened Valence Effects for Governing Parties during Election Campaigns. Party Politics.
3. Achen C.H. Two-step hierarchical estimation: beyond regression analysis. Political Analysis 2005, 13(4).
4. Adams J., Merrill S. Policy-seeking parties in a parliamentary democracy with proportional representation: a valence-uncertainty model. British Journal of Political Science 2009, 39:539-558.
5. Adams J. A theory of spatial competition with biased voters: party policies viewed temporally and comparatively. British Journal of Political Science 2001, 31:121-158.
6. Alt J.E. The Politics of Economic Decline: Economic Management and Political Behaviour in Britain Since 1964 1979, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
7. Ansolabehere S. Voters, candidates, and parties. The Oxford Handbook of Political Economy 2006, Oxford University Press, Oxford. B.R. Weingast, D.A. Wittman, (Eds.).
8. Bara J., Budge I. Party Policy and Ideology: Still New Labour?. Parliamentary Affairs 2001, 54(4):590-606.
9. Bélanger É., Meguid B.M. Issue salience, issue ownership, and issue-based vote choice. Electoral Studies 2008, 27(3):477-491.
10. Bellucci P. Tracing the cognitive and affective roots of 'party competence': Italy and Britain, 2001. Electoral Studies 2006, 25(3):548-569.
11. Bennet L.L., Bennet S.E. Living with Leviathan: Americans Coming to Terms with Big Government 1990, University Press of Kansas, Lawrence, KS.
12. Borre O. Issue Voting: An Introduction 2001, Aarhus University Press, Aarhus.
13. Brambor T., et al. Understanding interaction models: Improving empirical analyses. Political Analysis 2006, 14(1):63-82.
14. Budge I., Farlie D.J. Explaining and Predicting Elections: Issue Effects and Party Strategies in Twenty-three Democracies 1983, Allen & Unwin, London, Boston.
15. Buttice M.K., Stone W. Candidates Matter: Policy and Valence Differences in 2006 2010, Typescript.
16. Carmines E.G., Stimson J.A. Issue Evolution: Race and the Transformation of American Politics 1989, Princeton University Press, Princeton.
17. Cho S., Endersby J.W. Issues, the spatial theory of voting, and British general elections: a comparison of proximity and directional models. Public Choice 2003, 114:275-293.
18. Clark M., Leiter D. Does the Ideological Dispersion of Parties Mediate the Electoral Impact of Valence? A Cross-National Study of Party Support in Nine Western European Democracies 2010, Paper presented at the 2010 APSA meeting (Washington, USA).
19. Clark M. Valence and electoral outcomes in Western Europe, 1976-1998. Electoral Studies 2009, 28(1):111-122.
20. Clarke H., et al. Political Choice in Britain 2004, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
21. Clarke H.D., et al. Performance Politics and the British Voter 2009, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
22. Converse P.E. The nature of belief systems in the mass public. Ideology and Discontent 1964, Free Press, New York. D.E. Apter, (Ed.).
23. Cox G.W. Centripetal and centrifugal incentives in electoral systems. American Journal of Political Science 1990, 34(4):903-935.
24. Davis O., Hinich M., Ordeshook P. An expository development of a mathematical model of the electoral process. American Political Science Review 1970, 64(2):426-448.
25. Dow J.K. A comparative spatial analysis of majoritarian and proportional systems. Electoral Studies 2001, 20:109-125.
26. Dow J.K. Party system extremism in majoritarian and proportional electoral systems. British Journal of Political Science 2010, 41(2):341-361.
27. Downs A. An Economic Theory of Democracy 1957, Harper and Row, New York.
28. Endersby J., Galatas S. British parties and spatial competition: dimensions of party evaluation in the 1992 election. Public Choice 1998, 97(3):363-382.
29. Enelow J., Hinich M. The Spatial Theory of Voting 1984, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
30. Evans G., Andersen R. Do issues decide? Partisan conditioning and perceptions of party issue positions through the electoral cycle. British Elections and Parties Review 2004, 14:18-39.
31. Evans, G., Tilley, J., forthcoming. The Strange Death of Class Politics: How elite convergence explains the decline of class voting. The Journal of Politics.
32. Evans G. The End of Class Politics? Class Voting in Comparative Context 1999, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
33. Evans G. The continued significance of class voting. Annual Review Political Science 2000, 3:401-417.
34. Ezrow L. Parties' policy programmes and the dog that didn't Bark: no evidence that proportional systems promote extreme party positioning. British Journal of Political Science 2008, 38:479-497.
35. Ezrow L. Reply to Dow: party positions, votes and the mediating role of electoral systems?. British Journal of Political Science 2010, 41(2):448-452.
36. Fiorina M.P. Retrospective Voting in American National Elections 1981, Yale University Press, New Haven.
37. Franklin M., et al. Electoral Change: Responses to Evolving Social and Attitudinal Structures in Western Countries 1992, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, New York.
38. Freire A. Issue voting in Portugal: the 2002 legislative elections. West European Politics 2004, 27(5):779-800.
39. Green J., Hobolt S.B. Owning the issue agenda: party strategies and vote choices in British elections. Electoral Studies 2008, 27(3):460-476.
40. Green J. When voters and parties agree: valence issues and party competition. Political Studies 2007, 55(3):629-655.
41. Green-Pedersen C. The growing importance of issue competition: the changing nature of party competition in Western Europe. Political Studies 2007, 55(3):607-628.
42. Hazan R. Center parties and systematic polarisation, an exploration of recent trends in Western Europe. Journal of Theoretical Politics 1995, 7(4):421-445.
43. Hibbs D.A. Political parties and macroeconomic policy. American Political Science Review 1977, 71:1467-1487.
44. Hoff P.D. A First Course in Bayesian Statistical Methods 2009, Springer, Seattle.
45. Huber J. Values and partisanship in left-right orientation: measuring ideology. European Journal of Political Research 1989, 5(17):599-621.
46. Jackman S. Bayesian Analysis for the Social Sciences. Sussex 2009, Wiley.
47. Johns R. Credit where it's due? Valence politics, attributions of responsibility, and multi-level elections. Political Behavior 2011, 33(1):53-77.
48. Party Systems and Voter Alignments 1967, Free Press, New York. S.M. Lipset, S. Rokkan, (Eds.).
49. Londregan J., Romer T. Polarisation, incumbency, and the personal vote. Political Economy: Institutions, Competition, and Representation 1993, Cambridge University Press, New York. W.A. Barnett (Ed.).
50. Luke D.A. Multilevel Modeling 2004, Sage, Thousand Oaks.
51. Meguid B.M. Party Competition Between Unequals: Strategies and Electoral Fortunes in Western Europe 2008, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
52. Nie N.H., et al. The Changing American Voter 1976, Harvard University Press, Cambridge.
53. Petrocik J.R. Issue ownership in presidential elections, with a 1980 case study. American Journal of Political Science 1996, 40:389-400.
54. Riker W. The Strategy of Rethoric. Campaigning for the American Constitution 1996, Yale University Press, New Haven.
55. Robertson D. A Theory of Party Competition 1976, John Wiley and Sons, London and New York.
56. Sanders, et al. Downs, stokes and the dynamics of electoral choice. British Journal of Political Science 2011, 41:287-314.
57. Sanders D. The impact of left-right ideology. Critical Elections: British Parties and Voters in Long-Term Perspective 1999, Sage, London. G. Evans, P. Norris (Eds.).
58. Sani G., Sartori G. Polarisation, fragmentation and competition in Western democracies. Western European Party Systems: Continuity and Change 1983, Sage, London. H. Daalder, P. Mair, (Eds.).
59. Sartori G. Parties and Party Systems: A Framework for Analysis 1976, Cambridge University Press, New York.
60. Schmitt H. Issue-Kompetenz oder policy-distanz?" Wahlen und Wähler 1998, Westdeutscher Verlag, Opladen. M. Kaase, H.-D. Klingemann (Eds.).
61. Schmitt H. Politische Repräsentation in Europa. Eine empirische Studie zur Interessenvermittlung durch allgemeine Wahlen 2001, Campus, Frankfurt.
62. Sears D.O. Symbolic politics: a socio-psychological theory. Explorations in Political Psychology 1993, Duke University Press, Durham, NC. S. Iyengar, M.J. McGuire, (Eds.).
63. Serra G. Polarisation of what? A model of elections with endogenous valence. The Journal of Politics 2010, 72(2):1-12.
64. Sniderman P.M., et al. Reasoning and Choice. Explorations in Political Psychology 1991, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
65. Steenbergen M.R., Jones B.S. Modeling multilevel data structures. American Journal of Political Science 2002, 46(1):218-237.
66. Stokes D. Spatial models of party competition. American Political Science Review 1963, 57(2):368-377.
67. Stokes D. Valence politics. Electoral Politics 1992, Clarendon Press, Oxford. D. Kavanagh, (Ed.).
68. Stone W., Buttice M.K. Voters in context: the politics of citizen behavior. The Oxford Handbook of American Elections and Political Behavior 2008, Oxford University Press, Oxford. J.E. Leighley, (Ed.).
69. Taylor M., Herman V.M. Party systems and government stability. American Political Science Review 1971, 65(1):28-37.
70. van der Brug W., Mugan A. Charisma, leader effects and support for right-wing populist parties. Party Politics 2007, 13(1):29-51.
71. van der Brug W., Fennema M., Tillie J. Anti-immigrant parties in Europe: ideological or Protest vote?. European Journal of Political Research 2000, 37(1):77-102.
72. van der Brug W., Franklin M., Tóka G. One electorate or many? Differences in party preference formation between new and established European democracies. Electoral Studies 2008, 27(4):589-600.
73. van der Brug W. Issue ownership and party choice. Electoral Studies 2004, 23(2):209-233.
74. Van der Eijk C., Franklin M. Elections and Voters 2009, Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke.
75. Van der Eijk C., et al. Choosing Europe? The European Electorate and National Politics in the Face of Union 1996, University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor.
76. Van der Eijk C., et al. Rethinking the dependent variable in voting behavior: on the measurement and analysis of electoral utilities. Electoral Studies 2006, 25(3):424-447.
77. Wlezien C. On the salience of political issues: the problem with 'most important problem'. Electoral Studies 2005, 24:555-579.