The article examines the relationship between corruption and voting behavior by defining two distinct channels: pocketbook corruption voting, i.e. how personal experiences with corruption affect voting behavior; and sociotropic corruption voting, i.e. how perceptions of corruption in society do so. Individual and aggregate data from Slovakia fail to support hypotheses that corruption is an undifferentiated valence issue, that it depends on the presence of a viable anti-corruption party, or that voters tolerate (or even prefer) corruption, and support the hypothesis that the importance of each channel depends on the salience of each source of corruption and that pocketbook corruption voting prevails unless a credible anti-corruption party shifts media coverage of corruption and activates sociotropic corruption voting. Previous studies may have underestimated the prevalence of corruption voting by not accounting for both channels.

Shifting our understanding of populism from a question of core identity to a description of party appeals allows for a neutralization of the term's negative connotations by allowing that all parties may use populist appeals to some extent. It is then possible to address a party's use of populist appeals by measuring its distinctly nonpopulist appeals, which are usually less bound up with normative judgments. Although the preliminary analysis of Slovakia shows a relatively close empirical fit among the theoretical elements in the existing literature, two categories of populist appeals are identified: the outward‐looking appeals that vary strongly with a party's relationship to power, and inward‐looking appeals that remain more stable over time. Use of these by politicians may offer clues to the origination, attractiveness, and longevity of populist and nonpopulist appeals. Cambiar nuestro entendimiento del populismo desde la cuestión de identidad a una que se enfoca en los llamados partidistas nos permite neutralizar la connotación negativa del término populismo puesto que nos lleva a reconocer que todos los partidos recurren a los llamados populistas en una medida u otra. Es entonces posible establecer el uso de los atractivos del populismo por parte del partido al medir sus atractivos no‐populistas, los cuales usualmente están menos vinculados con opiniones normativas. Aunque el análisis preliminar de Eslovaquia demuestra un ajuste empírico perfecto relativamente cerrado entre los elementos teóricos en la literatura existente, dos categorías de las características populistas son identificadas: los atractivos observados en el exterior que varían fuertemente con la relación del partido con el poder y los atractivos observados en el interior que permanecen mucho más estables a través del tiempo. El uso de éstos por los políticos puede ofrecer claves para el origen, atractivo, y longevidad de los atractivos populistas y no‐populistas.

The more populism enters public debates, the more it needs close scrutiny. Central and Eastern Europe offers a useful context for exploring the diversity of parties identified as populist. Antiestablishment rhetoric provides a suitable conceptual starting point because of its pervasive role in the region's political discourse. Using a new expert survey, this article details the relationship between antiestablishment salience and political positions, showing that anti-establishment parties occupy a full range across both economic and cultural dimensions and many occupy more centrist positions. Narrowing the focus to content analysis of anti-establishment parties' thin ideology in the Czech Republic, Poland and Slovakia, it is concurrently found that for many actors (including those usually labelled as populist) antiestablishment rhetoric is indeed predominant, yet not always extensively combined with other elements of populism: people-centrism and invocation of general will. The findings are important for understanding multiple varieties of anti-establishment politics also beyond the region.

This article presents a survey of political cleavage. The survey presented in the article asks what scholars mean when they talk about cleavages; the revelations of recent studies about the contours of new cleavages, their origins, and their consequences are included. The model of difference, divide, and cleavage is illustrated in the article. The article lists the new typologies of cleavage, and the new explanations for cleavage are also provided.