Who emphasizes and who blurs? Party strategies in multidimensional competition

European Union Politics

Volumn 13, Issue 2, 2012, Pages 269-292

  Rovny, Jan ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF GOTHENBURG   (Sweden)

Author keywords

ambiguity; dimensionality; obfuscation; party competition; party strategy

Indexed keywords

EID: 84868643841     PISSN: 14651165     EISSN: 17412757     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/1465116511435822     Document Type: Article

References (50)

1. 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 (3): 513-529.
2. Alvarez RMInformation and Elections. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press; 1998:.
3. Bartels LM.Issue voting under uncertainty: An empirical test.American Journal of Political Science. 1986;30 (4): 709-728.
4. Benoit K,Laver M.The dimensionality of political space: Epistemological and methodological considerations.European Union Politics. 2012;13 (2): 194-218.
5. Budge I,Farlie DExplaining and Predicting Elections: Issue Effects and Party Strategies in Twenty-Three Democracies. London: Allen & Unwin; 1983:.
6. Budge I,Robertson D,Hearl DIdeology, Strategy and Party Change: Spatial Analyses of Post-War Election Programmes in 19 Democracies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1987:.
7. Budge I,Klingemann HD,Volkens A,Bara J,Tanenbaum E,Fording RC,Hearl DJ,Kim HM,McDonald M,Mendez SMapping Policy Preferences: Estimates for Parties, Electors, and Governments 1945-1998. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2001:.
8. Carmines EG,Stimson JAIssue Evolution: Race and the Transformation of American Politics. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press; 1989:.
9. Chappell H,Keech W.Policy motivation and party differences in a dynamic spatial model of party competition.American Political Science Review. 1986;80 (3): 881-899.
10. Cox GW,McCubbins MDLegislative Leviathan: Party Government in the House. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2007:.
11. De Vries CE,Hobolt SB.When dimensions collide: The electoral success of issue entrepreneurs.European Union Politics. 2012;13 (2): 246-268.
12. De Vries CE,Marks G.The struggle over dimensionality: A note on theory and empirics.European Union Politics. 2012;13 (2): 185-193.
13. Downs AAn Economic Theory of Democracy. New York: Harper & Row; 1957:.
14. Enelow J,Hinich MJ.A new approach to voter uncertainty in the Downsian spatial model.American Journal of Political Science. 1981;25 (3): 483-493.
15. Enelow JM,Hinich MJ.A general probabilistic spatial theory of elections.Public Choice. 1989;61 (2): 101-113.
16. Ezrow L.Research note: On the inverse relationship between votes and proximity for niche parties.European Journal of Political Research. 2008;47 (2): 206-220.
17. Franklin CH.Eschewing obfuscation? Campaigns and the perception of US Senate incumbents.American Political Science Review. 1991;85 (4): 1193-1214.
18. Gill J.An entropy measure of uncertainty in vote choice.Electoral Studies. 2005;24 (3): 371-392.
19. Hooghe L,Marks G,Wilson CJ.Does left/right structure party positions on European integration?.Comparative Political Studies. 2002;35 (8): 965-989.
20. Hooghe L,Bakker R,Brigevich A,De Vries C,Edwards EE,Marks G,Rovny J,Steenbergen M,Vachudova MA.Reliability and validity of measuring party positions: The Chapel Hill expert surveys of 2002 and 2006.European Journal of Political Research. 2010;49 (4): 684-703.
21. Hotelling H.Stability in competition.Economic Journal. 1929;39 (153): 41-57.
22. Johnson JW and Wallack JS (2007) Database of electoral systems and the personal vote. URL (accessed 4 January 2012): http://polisci2.ucsd.edu/jwjohnson/espv.htm.
23. Kalyvas S,Marantzidis N.Greek communism, 1968-2001.East European Politics and Societies. 2002;16 (3): 665-690.
24. Kam CJParty Discipline and Parliamentary Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2009:.
25. Kedar O.When moderate voters prefer extreme parties: Policy balancing in parliamentary elections.American Political Science Review. 2005;99 (2): 185-199.
26. Kitschelt H.Formation of party systems in East Central Europe.Politics and Society. 1992;20 (1): 7-50.
27. Kitschelt HThe Transformation of European Social Democracy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1994:.
28. Kitschelt H (2004) Diversification and reconfiguration of party systems in postindustrial democracies. Europäische Politik 03/2004, Friedrich Ebert Stiftung. URL (accessed 4 January 2012): http://library.fes.de/pdf-files/id/02608.pdf.
29. Kriesi H,Grande E,Lachat R,Dolezal M,Bornschier S,Frey TWest European Politics in the Age of Globalization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2008:.
30. Laver M,Hunt WBParty and Policy Competition. London: Routledge; 1992:.
31. Lipset SM,Rokkan SCleavage Structures, Party Systems, and Voter Alignments: An Introduction. New York: Free Press; 1967:.
32. McKelvey RD.Intransitivities in multidimensional voting models and some implications for agenda control.Journal of Economic Theory. 1976;12:472-482.
33. Marks G,Hooghe L,Nelson M,Edwards EE.Party competition and European integration in the East and West: Different structure, same causality.Comparative Political Studies. 2006;39 (2): 155-175.
34. Marks G,Hooghe L,Steenbergen M,Bakker R.Crossvalidating data on party positioning on European integration.Electoral Studies. 2007;26 (1): 23-38.
35. Meguid B.Competition between unequals: The role of mainstream party strategy in niche party success.American Political Science Review. 2005;99 (3): 347-359.
36. Meguid BParty Competition Between Unequals: Strategies and Electoral Fortunes in Western Europe. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2008:.
37. Meret S (2010) The Danish People's Party, the Italian Northern League and the Austrian Freedom Party in a Comparative Perspective: Party Ideology and Electoral Support. Unpublished doctoral thesis, Aalborg University, Aalborg.
38. Mudde CPopulist Radical Right Parties in Europe. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2007:.
39. Petrocik JR.Issue ownership in presidential elections, with a 1980 case study.American Journal of Political Science. 1996;40:825-850.
40. Rabinowitz G,Macdonald SE.A directional theory of issue voting.American Political Science Review. 1989;83 (1): 93-121.
41. Riker WHThe Art of Political Manipulation. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press; 1986:.
42. Rovny J and Edwards EE (2012) Struggle over dimensionality: Political competition in Western and Eastern Europe. East European Politics and Societies 26(1).
43. Schattschneider EEThe Semisovereign People: A Realist's View of Democracy in America. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston; 1960:.
44. Schofield N.Political competition and multiparty coalition governments.European Journal of Political Research. 1993;23 (1): 1-33.
45. Shepsle KA.The strategy of ambiguity: Uncertainty and electoral competition.American Political Science Review. 1972;66 (2): 555-568.
46. Steenbergen MR,Scott DJEuropean Integration and Political Conflict. Marks G, ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2004:165-192.
47. Stimson JATides of Consent: How Public Opinion Shapes American Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2004:.
48. Stimson JA,Thiébaut C,Tiberj V.The evolution of policy attitudes in France.European Union Politics. 2012;13 (2): 293-316.
49. Stoll H.Elite-level conflict salience and dimensionality in Western Europe: Concepts and empirical findings.West European Politics. 2010;33 (3): 445-473.
50. Volkens A, Lacewell O, Lehmann P, Regel S, Schultze H and Werner A (2011) The Manifesto Data Collection. Manifesto Project MRG/CMP/MARPOR, Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin für Sozialforschung (WZB).