scholarly journals Not so Responsive after all: European Parties do not Respond to Public Opinion Shifts across Multiple Issue Dimensions

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tom O'Grady ◽  
Tarik Abou-Chadi
Keyword(s):  
Public Opinion ◽  
Spatial Models ◽  
Political Conflict ◽  
Policy Outcomes ◽  
Policy Positions ◽  
State Involvement ◽  
Party Positions ◽  
Dimensional Measure ◽  
European Parties ◽  
Issue Dimensions

Many studies have found that European parties change their policy positions in response to changes in public opinion. This is both theoretically and normatively appealing, suggesting that European party politics operates in a way that is consistent with spatial models. Nonetheless, virtually all previous studies are based on a single, uni-dimensional measure of public opinion: left-right self-placement from the Eurobarometer surveys. This measure has a number of flaws, including the fact that political conflict in Europe now occurs across multiple issue dimensions beyond the classic divide on state involvement in the economy. We use new measures of Europeans' ideological positions across four different issue dimensions and twenty-six countries from 1981-2016, together with data on parties' policy positions from their manifestos, to re-evaluate findings on responsiveness. Across many different model specifications, samples and outcome measures, we find virtually no evidence that European political parties respond to public opinion on any issue dimension. Our findings suggest that scholars may require better measures of party positions, more nuanced theories of responsiveness (for example to sub-groups, or across longer time horizons), or may need to re-focus their attention towards responsiveness via policy outcomes rather than parties' policy commitments.

scholarly journals Not so responsive after all: European parties do not respond to public opinion shifts across multiple issue dimensions

2019 ◽  
Vol 6 (4) ◽  
pp. 205316801989138
Author(s):  
Tom O’Grady ◽  
Tarik Abou-Chadi
Keyword(s):  
Public Opinion ◽  
Spatial Models ◽  
Political Conflict ◽  
Policy Outcomes ◽  
Policy Positions ◽  
State Involvement ◽  
Party Positions ◽  
Dimensional Measure ◽  
European Parties ◽  
Issue Dimensions

Many studies have found that European parties change their policy positions in response to changes in public opinion. This is both theoretically and normatively appealing, suggesting that European party politics operates in a way that is consistent with spatial models. Nonetheless, virtually all previous studies are based on a single, uni-dimensional measure of public opinion: left–right self-placement from the Eurobarometer surveys. This measure has a number of flaws, including the fact that political conflict in Europe now occurs across multiple issue dimensions beyond the classic divide on state involvement in the economy. We used new measures of Europeans’ ideological positions across four different issue dimensions and 26 countries from 1981–2016, together with data on parties’ policy positions from their manifestos, to re-evaluate findings on responsiveness. Across many different model specifications, samples and outcome measures, we found virtually no evidence that European political parties respond to public opinion on any issue dimension. Our findings suggest that scholars may require better measures of party positions, more nuanced theories of responsiveness (for example to sub-groups, or across longer time horizons), or may need to refocus their attention towards responsiveness via policy outcomes rather than parties’ policy commitments.

The Informational Role of Party Leader Changes on Voter Perceptions of Party Positions

2017 ◽  
Vol 49 (3) ◽  
pp. 977-996 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pablo Fernandez-Vazquez ◽  
Zeynep Somer-Topcu
Keyword(s):  
Spatial Models ◽  
Party Competition ◽  
Party Leader ◽  
Necessary Condition ◽  
Policy Positions ◽  
Party Positions ◽  
European Parties ◽  
Citizen Perceptions ◽  
Party Policy Positions

According to spatial models of elections, citizen perceptions of party policy positions are a key determinant of voting choices. Yet recent scholarship from Europe suggests that voters do not adjust their perceptions according to what parties advocate in their campaigns. This article argues that voters develop a more accurate understanding of parties’ ideological positions following a leadership change because a new leader increases the credibility of party policy offerings. Focusing on Western European parties in the 1979–2012 period, it shows that having a new leader is a necessary condition for voters to more accurately perceive the left–right placements of opposition parties. Voters do not use party platforms to form perceptions of incumbent parties’ positions, regardless of whether the leader is new or veteran. These results have important implications for models of party competition and democratic representation.

Public Opinion, Party Politics, and the Welfare State

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Johannes Lindvall ◽  
David Rueda
Keyword(s):  
Public Opinion ◽  
Welfare State ◽  
Party System ◽  
Median Voter ◽  
Party Politics ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Party Positions ◽  
Long Run ◽  
The 1960S ◽  
The Welfare State

This chapter examines the long-run relationship between public opinion, party politics, and the welfare state. It argues that when large parties receive a clear signal concerning the median voter’s position on the welfare state, vote-seeking motivations dominate and the large parties in the party system converge on the position of the median voter. When the position of the median voter is more difficult to discern, however, policy-seeking motivations dominate, and party positions diverge. This argument implies that the effects of government partisanship on welfare state policy are more ambiguous than generally understood. The countries covered in the chapter are Denmark, France, Germany, Norway and the United Kingdom (going back to the 1960s). The number of observations is (necessarily) limited, but the diverse cases illustrate a common electoral dynamic centered around the position of the median voter.

How government-controlled media shifts policy attitudes through framing

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-16
Author(s):  
Jennifer Pan ◽  
Zijie Shao ◽  
Yiqing Xu
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Public Opinion ◽  
Authoritarian Regimes ◽  
Policy Positions ◽  
Policy Issues ◽  
Composite Measures ◽  
Policy Attitudes ◽  
Tv News

Abstract Research shows that government-controlled media is an effective tool for authoritarian regimes to shape public opinion. Does government-controlled media remain effective when it is required to support changes in positions that autocrats take on issues? Existing theories do not provide a clear answer to this question, but we often observe authoritarian governments using government media to frame policies in new ways when significant changes in policy positions are required. By conducting an experiment that exposes respondents to government-controlled media—in the form of TV news segments—on issues where the regime substantially changed its policy positions, we find that by framing the same issue differently, government-controlled media moves respondents to adopt policy positions closer to the ones espoused by the regime regardless of individual predisposition. This result holds for domestic and foreign policy issues, for direct and composite measures of attitudes, and persists up to 48 hours after exposure.

Understanding Change and Stability in Party Ideologies: Do Parties Respond to Public Opinion or to Past Election Results?

2004 ◽  
Vol 34 (4) ◽  
pp. 589-610 ◽  
Author(s):  
JAMES ADAMS ◽  
MICHAEL CLARK ◽  
LAWRENCE EZROW ◽  
GARRETT GLASGOW
Keyword(s):  
Public Opinion ◽  
Political Representation ◽  
Decision Rules ◽  
The Political ◽  
Political Environment ◽  
Policy Positions ◽  
Election Results ◽  
Post War ◽  
Election Strategies ◽  
West European

Previous research explains the evolution of parties' ideological positions in terms of decision rules that stress the uncertainty of the political environment. The authors extend this research by examining whether parties adjust their ideologies in response to two possible influences: shifts in public opinion, and past election results. Their empirical analyses, which are based on the Comparative Manifesto Project's codings of parties' post-war programmes in eight West European nations, suggest that parties respond to shifts in public opinion, but that these effects are only significant in situations where public opinion is clearly shifting away from the party's policy positions. By contrast, no evidence is found here that parties adjust their ideologies in response to past election results. These findings have important implications for parties' election strategies and for models of political representation.

scholarly journals Party Responsiveness to Public Opinion in Young Democracies

2021 ◽  
pp. 003232172199363
Author(s):  
Raimondas Ibenskas ◽  
Jonathan Polk
Keyword(s):  
Public Opinion ◽  
Political Parties ◽  
Strong Support ◽  
Policy Positions ◽  
The Public ◽  
National Surveys ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Established Democracies ◽  
Expert Surveys ◽  
Cross National

Are political parties in young democracies responsive to the policy preferences of the public? Compared to extensive scholarship on party responsiveness in established democracies, research on party responsiveness in young democracies is limited. We argue that weaker programmatic party–voter linkages in post-communist democracies create incentives for parties to respond to their supporters rather than the more general electorate. Such responsiveness occurs in two ways. First, parties follow shifts in the mean position of their supporters. Second, drawing on the research on party–voter congruence, we argue that parties adjust their policy positions to eliminate previous incongruence between themselves and their supporters. Analyses based on a comprehensive dataset that uses expert surveys, parties’ manifestoes and election surveys to measure parties’ positions, and several cross-national and national surveys to measure voters’ preferences provide strong support for this argument.

The Nature of Partisan Conflict in Public Opinion: Asymmetric or Symmetric?

2020 ◽  
Vol 49 (1) ◽  
pp. 46-58
Author(s):  
Maria Narayani Lasala Blanco ◽  
Robert Y. Shapiro ◽  
Joy Wilke
Keyword(s):  
Public Opinion ◽  
The United States ◽  
Political Conflict ◽  
Mass Public ◽  
Original Analysis ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
Trend Data ◽  
Partisan Conflict ◽  
The Right ◽  
Shed Light

What are the dynamics of partisan conflict in the mass public in the United States? Has this conflict been driven by Republicans moving to the right across a wide range of issues, or have Democrats contributed to this as well? Have these changes been symmetric, occurring for both sides, or asymmetric, occurring for just one side? Understanding how the partisan gaps have widened may shed light on potential prospects for reversing extreme political conflict in public opinion. This paper examines this question with an analysis of opinion trend data over the last 40 years. It includes an original analysis of these trends among racial and ethnic groups. We find that symmetric partisan changes have only occurred among whites. Overall partisan differences have been less for Blacks and Hispanics than for whites.

Public Opinion and Policy Making in Canada 1994–2001

2004 ◽  
Vol 37 (3) ◽  
pp. 505-529 ◽  
Author(s):  
François Petry ◽  
Matthew Mendelsohn
Keyword(s):  
Public Opinion ◽  
Policy Outcomes ◽  
Significant Drop ◽  
Majority Opinion ◽  
The Public ◽  
Opinion Publique ◽  
Low Profile ◽  
Jean Chretien ◽  
The Right ◽  
Pour Cent

Abstract. This study examines the consistency between public opinion and public policy during the period 1994–2001 by matching responses to national survey questions on 230 issues with enacted policy proposals on the same issues. Policy outcomes were consistent with majority opinion 49 per cent of the time. This represents a significant drop from 69 per cent during the Mulroney years (1985–1993). Low opinion-policy consistency since 1994 is primarily attributable to divergences between public majorities that are increasingly supportive of a change toward the right and the policies of Jean Chrétien that are more leftist and status quo oriented than those of his predecessor. We argue that these divergences go largely unnoticed by the public because they tend to occur on low-profile issues. On the other hand, the evidence suggests a much tighter correlation between opinion and policy on a small number of high-profile issues of which the public is much more aware, thereby creating the appearance of attentiveness to Canadian public opinion.Résumé. En comparant les décisions sur 230 enjeux de politiques publiques avec les résultats de sondages nationaux sur ces mêmes enjeux, cet article cherche à quantifier le degré d'adéquation entre l'opinion publique et la politique gouvernementale entre 1994 et 2001. Les calculs révèlent que seulement 49 pour cent des décisions du gouvernement de Jean Chrétien sont allées dans le même sens que l'opinion publique, en nette diminution par rapport aux 69 pour cent observés pendant la période Mulroney (1985–1993). La baisse de corrélation depuis 1994 est principalement attribuable à la divergence entre une opinion publique de plus en plus favorable au changement et idéologiquement orientée à droite et la politique du gouvernement de Jean Chrétien sensiblement plus résistante au changement et idéologiquement plus à gauche que celle de son prédécesseur. Le public a tendance à ignorer le manque de corrélation entre l'opinion et les politiques gouvernementales parce que les enjeux en question sont relativement peu importants. Par contre, il semble que la corrélation entre l'opinion et les politiques soit beaucoup plus forte dans un petit nombre d'enjeux importants que le public reconnaît, créant ainsi l'apparence d'un gouvernement attentif aux souhaits de l'opinion publique canadienne.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document