When dimensions collide: The electoral success of issue entrepreneurs

European Union Politics

Volumn 13, Issue 2, 2012, Pages 246-268

  de Vries, Catherine E ^a,b   Hobolt, Sara B ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF GENEVA   (Switzerland)

^b UNIVERSITY OF AMSTERDAM   (Netherlands)

^c LONDON SCHOOL OF ECONOMICS   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

European integration; issue entrepreneurship; issue evolution; issue voting; party competition

Indexed keywords

EID: 84867195891     PISSN: 14651165     EISSN: 17412757     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/1465116511434788     Document Type: Article

References (53)

1. Adams G.Abortion: Evidence of an issue evolution.American Journal of Political Science. 1997;41:718-737.
2. Adams J,Clark M,Ezrow L,Glasgow G.Are niche parties fundamentally different from mainstream parties? The causes and the electoral consequences of Western European parties' policy shifts, 1976-1998.American Journal of Political Science. 2006;50:513-529.
3. Alford J,Hibbing J.Increased Incumbency Advantage in the House.Journal of Politics. 1981;43:1042-1061.
4. Bakker R,Jolly S,Polk J.Complexity in the European party space: Exploring dimensionality with experts.European Union Politics. 2012;13 (2): 219-245.
5. Bartolini SComparing Party System Change. Pennings PLane JE, ed. London: Routledge; 1998:40-61.
6. Beck N,Katz JJ.What to do (and not to do) with time-series cross-section data in comparative politics.American Political Science Review. 1995;89:634-647.
7. Beck N,Katz JJPolitical Analysis. Freeman JR, ed. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press; 1996:1-36.
8. Benoit K,Laver M.The dimensionality of political space: Epistemological and methodological considerations.European Union Politics. 2012;13 (2): 194-218.
9. Browne WJMCMC Estimation in MLwiN. London: Institute of Education, University of London; 2003:.
10. Carmines E,Stimson JA.On the structure and sequence of issue evolution.American Political Science Review. 1986;80:901-920.
11. Carmines E,Stimson JAIssue Evolution: Race and the Transformation of American Politics. Ithaca, NY: Princeton University Press; 1989:.
12. Carmines E,Stimson JAAgenda Formation. Riker W, ed. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press; 1993:151-168.
13. De Vries CE.Sleeping giant: Fact or fairytale? How European integration affects vote choice in national elections.European Union Politics. 2007;8:363-385.
14. De Vries CE,Edwards E.Taking Europe to its extremes: Extremist parties and public euroscepticism.Party Politics. 2009;15:5-28.
15. De Vries CE,Marks G.The struggle over dimensionality: A note on theory and empirics.European Union Politics. 2012;13 (2): 185-193.
16. Downs AAn Economic Theory of Democracy. New York: Harper & Row; 1957:.
17. Duch RM,Stevenson RThe Economic Vote: How Political and Economic Institutions Condition Election Results. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2008:.
18. Enelow JM,Hinich MJThe Spatial Theory of Voting: An Introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1984:.
19. Gellman A,Hill JJData Analysis Using Regression and Multilevel/Hierarchical Models. New York: Cambridge University Press; 2007:.
20. Hobolt SB and De Vries CE (2010) Issue entrepreneurship and multiparty competition. Paper presented at the MPSA Annual Conference, 22-25 April, Chicago, USA.
21. Hobolt SB,Karp J.Voters and coalition governments.Electoral Studies. 2010;29:299-307.
22. Hobolt SB,Spoon JJ,Tilley J.A vote against Europe? Explaining defection at the 1999 and 2004 European Parliament elections.British Journal of Political Science. 2009;39:93-115.
23. Hooghe L,Bakker R,Brigevich A,De Vries CE, et al.Reliability and validity of measuring party positions: The Chapel Hill expert surveys of 2002 and 2006.European Journal of Political Research. 2010;49:687-703.
24. Hooghe L,Marks G,Wilson CJ.Does left/right structure party positions on European integration?.Comparative Political Studies. 2002;35:965-989.
25. Hug SAltering Party Systems: Strategic Behavior and the Emergence of New Political Parties in Western Democracies. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press; 2001:.
26. Inglehart RThe Silent Revolution: Changing Values and Political Styles Among Western Publics. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press; 1977:.
27. Jackman S.Estimation and inference via Bayesian simulation: An introduction to Markov Chain Monte Carlo.American Journal of Political Science. 2000;44:369-398.
28. The Sage Handbook of Political Advertising. Kaid LLHoltz-Bacha C, ed. London: Sage; 2006:.
29. Key VOThe Responsible Electorate: Rationality in Presidential Voting, 1936-1960. New York: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press; 1966:.
30. Kitschelt HP.Left-libertarian parties: Explaining innovation in competitive party systems.World Politics. 1988;40:194-234.
31. Kriesi H,Grande E,Lachat R,Dolezal M, et al.Globalization and the transformation of the national political space: Six European countries compared.European Journal of Political Research. 2006;45:921-956.
32. Kriesi H,Grande E,Lachat R,Dolezal M, et alWest European Politics in the Age of Globalization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2008:.
33. Laver M,Schofield NMultiparty Government: The Politics of Coalition in Europe. Ann Arbor: Michigan University Press; 1998:.
34. Lewis-Beck MS,Stegmaier M.Economic determinants of electoral outcomes.Annual Review of Political Science. 2000;3:183-219.
35. Lindaman K,Haider-Markel DP.Issue evolution, political parties and the culture wars.Political Science Quarterly. 2002;55:91-110.
36. Marks G,Hooghe L,Steenbergen MR,Bakker R.Cross-validating data on party positioning on European integration.Electoral Studies. 2007;26:23-38.
37. Meguid B.Competition between unequals: The role of mainstream party strategy and niche party success.American Political Science Review. 2005;99:347-360.
38. Meguid BParty Competition between Unequals: Strategies and Electoral Fortunes in Western Europe. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2008:.
39. Netjes CE,Binnema H.The salience of the European integration issue: Three data sources compared.Electoral Studies. 2007;26:39-49.
40. Payne JL.The personal electoral advantage of House incumbents.American Politics Quarterly. 1980;8:375-398.
41. Rabinowitz G,Macdonald SE.A directional theory of issue voting.American Political Science Review. 1989;83:93-121.
42. Ray L.Measuring party positions on European integration: Results from an expert survey.European Journal of Political Research. 1999;36:283-306.
43. Riker WHLiberalism against Populism: A Confrontation Between the Theory of Democracy and the Theory of Social Choice. Long Grove: Waveland Press; 1982:.
44. Riker WHThe Art of Political Manipulation. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press; 1986:.
45. Riker WHThe Strategy of Rhetoric: Campaigning for the American Constitution. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press; 1996:.
46. Rovny J.Who emphasizes and who blurs? Party strategies in multidimensional competition.European Union Politics. 2012;13 (2): 269-292.
47. Sartori GParties and Party Systems: A Framework for Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2005:.
48. Schattschneider EEThe Semisovereign People: A Realist's View of Democracy in America. Hinsdale: The Dryden Press; 1960:.
49. Snijders TAB,Bosker RJMultilevel Analysis: An Introduction to Basic and Advanced Multilevel Modelling. London: Sage Publications; 1999:.
50. Steenbergen MR,Jones BS.Modelling multilevel data structures.American Journal of Political Science. 2002;46:218-237.
51. Steenbergen MR,Marks G.Evaluating expert surveys.European Journal of Political Research. 2007;46:347-366.
52. Strøm KMinority Government and Majority Rule. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1990:.
53. Warwick PV.Coalition government membership in West European parliamentary democracies.British Journal of Political Science. 1996;26:471-499.