Representation in the European Parliament: Factors affecting the attitude congruence of voters and candidates in the EP elections

European Union Politics

Volumn 14, Issue 1, 2013, Pages 3-22

  Walczak, Agnieszka ^a   van der Brug, Wouter ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF AMSTERDAM   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Attitudes; congruence; elections; European Parliament; representation

Indexed keywords

EID: 84873976051     PISSN: 14651165     EISSN: 17412757     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/1465116512456089     Document Type: Article

References (50)

1. Basinger SJ,Lavine H.Ambivalence, information and electoral choice.American Political Science Review. 2005;99 (2): 169-184.
2. Burchell JThe Evolution of Green Politics: Development and Change within European Green Parties. London: Earthscan Publications; 2002:.
3. Carey J,Shugart M.Incentives to cultivate a personal vote: A rank ordering of electoral formulas.Electoral Studies. 1995;14 (4): 417-439.
4. Childs SWomen and British Party Politics. Descriptive, Substantive and Symbolic Representation. Routledge: Taylor & Francis; 2008:.
5. Dalton RJ.Political parties and political representation. Party supporters and party elites in nine nations.Comparative Political Studies. 1985;18 (3): 267-299.
6. Dalton RJCitizen Politics: Public Opinion and Political Parties in Advanced Industrial Democracies. New York: Chatham House Publishers; 2002:.
7. De Vries C.Sleeping giant: Fact or fairytale? How European integration affects national elections.European Union Politics. 2007;8 (3): 363-385.
8. Delli Carpini MX,Keeter SWhat Americans Know about Politics and Why It Matters. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press; 1996:.
9. EES (2009a) European Parliament Election Study 2009 Voter Study, Advance Release 07.04.2010. Available at: http://www.piredeu.eu (accessed 20 July 2012).
10. EES (2009b) European Parliament Election Study 2009. Candidate Study. Advance Release July 2010. Available at: http://www.piredeu.eu (accessed 20 July 2012).
11. Evans G,De Graaf NDPolitical Choice Matters: Explaining the Strength of Class and Religious Cleavages in Cross-National Perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2012:.
12. Farrell DM,Scully RRepresenting Europe's Citizens? Electoral Institutions and the Failure of Parliamentary Representation. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2007:.
13. Franklin MEuropean Elections after Eastern Enlargement. Preliminary Results of the European Elections Study 2004. Marsh MMikhaylov SSchmitt H, ed. Mannheim: MZES; 2007:141-179.
14. Franklin M and Wessels B (2010) Stimulus, response and turnout variations at a European Parliament election. Annual Meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association, Chicago, Illinois, 22-25 April.
15. Giebler H, Haus E and Wessels B (2010) 2009 European Election Candidate Study - Codebook. Advance Release V2. Berlin: WZB. Available at: http://www.piredeu.eu.
16. Hobolt SB,Høyland B.Selection and sanctioning in European Parliament elections.British Journal of Political Science. 2011;41:477-498.
17. Holmberg SPolicy Representation in Western Democracies. Miller WEPierce RThomassen J, ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 1999:87-109.
18. Hooghe L,Marks G.A post-functionalist theory of European integration: From permissive consensus to constraining dissensus.British Journal of Political Science. 2008;39:1-23.
19. Hox JHMultilevel Analysis. Techniques and Applications. New York: Routledge; 2010:.
20. Huber J,Powell GB.Congruence between citizens and policymakers in two visions of liberal democracy.World Politics. 1994;46 (3): 291-326.
21. Kitschelt H,McGann AJThe Radical Right in Western Europe: A Comparative Analysis. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press; 1997:.
22. Kriesi H,Grande E,Lachat R, et alWest European Politics in the Age of Globalisation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2008:.
23. Lipset SMPolitical Man: The Social Basis of Politics. New York: Doubleday; 1960:.
24. Luskin RC.Measuring political sophistication.American Journal of Political Science. 1987;31 (4): 856-899.
25. Meguid BMParty Competition between Unequals: Strategies and Electoral Fortunes in Western Europe. New York: Cambridge University Press; 2008:.
26. Miller W,Stokes D.Constituency influence in Congress.American Political Science Review. 1963;57 (1): 45-56.
27. Mokken RJA Theory and Procedure of Scale Analysis with Applications in Political Research. The Hague: Mouton; 1971:.
28. Pitkin HThe Concept of Representation. Berkeley: University of California Press; 1967:.
29. Powell GBElections as Instruments of Democracy. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press; 2000:.
30. Reif K,Schmitt H.Nine second-order national elections - a conceptual framework for the analysis of European election results.European Journal of Political Research. 1980;8 (1): 3-44.
31. Rosenstone SJ,Hansen JMMobilization, Participation and Democracy in America. New York: Macmillan; 1993:.
32. Sartori G.Representational systems.International Encyclopaedia of the Social Sciences. 1968;13:470-475.
33. Scarrow SE.Political career paths and the European Parliament.Legislative Studies Quarterly. 1997;22 (2): 253-263.
34. Political Representation. Schapiro IStokes SWood E, ed. New York: Cambridge University Press; 2010:.
35. Schattschneider EEThe Semisovereign People. A Realist's View of Democracy in America. Hinsdale, IL: Dryden Press; 1975:.
36. Schmitt H,Thomassen JPolitical Representation and Legitimacy in the European Union. Schmitt HThomassen J, ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 1999:111-128.
37. Schmitt H,Thomassen J.Dynamic representation: The case of European integration.European Union Politics. 2000;1 (3): 318-339.
38. Schneider S.Nominal comparability is not enough: (In-)equivalence of construct validity of cross-national measures of educational attainment in the European Social Survey.Research in Social Stratification and Mobility. 2010;28 (3): 343-357.
39. Shugart M.Electoral efficiency and the move to mixed member systems.Electoral Studies. 2001;20 (2): 173-193.
40. Thomassen JElections at Home and Abroad: Essays in Honor of Warren E. Miller. Jennings MKMann TE, ed. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press; 1994:237-265.
41. Thomassen J,Schmitt H.Policy representation.European Journal of Political Research. 1997;32 (2): 165-184.
42. Thomassen J,Schmitt HPolitical Representation and Legitimacy in the European Union. Schmitt HThomassen J, ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 1999:186-209.
43. Van der Brug W,Van der Eijk CPolitical Representation and Legitimacy in the European Union. Schmitt HThomassen J, ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 1999:161-185.
44. Van der Brug W,Van Spanje J.Immigration, Europe and the 'new' cultural cleavage.European Journal of Political Research. 2009;48:308-334.
45. Van der Brug W,Franklin M,Tóká G.One electorate or many? Differences in party preference formation between new and established European democracies.Electoral Studies. 2008;27 (4): 589-600.
46. Van der Eijk C.Measuring agreement in ordered rating scales.Quality and Quantity. 2001;35:325-341.
47. Van der Eijk C,Franklin MChoosing Europe? The European Electorate and National Politics in the Face of Union. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press; 1996:.
48. Van Egmond MH,Sapir EV,Van der Brug W, et alEES 2009 Voter Study Advance Release Notes. Amsterdam: University of Amsterdam; 2010:.
49. Van Schuur W.Mokken scale analysis: Between the Guttman scale and parametric item response theory.Political Analysis. 2003;11 (2): 139-163.
50. Volkens A, Lacewell O, Regel S, Schultze H and Werner A (2010) The Manifesto Data Collection. Manifesto Project (MRG/CMP/MARPOR). Berlin: Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin für Sozialforschung (WZB). Available at: http://manifesto-project.wzb.eu/ (accessed 20 July 2012).