A change of heart? Analysing stability and change in European party positions

Koedam, Jelle

doi:10.1080/01402382.2021.1915659

Cited by 22 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 60 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Dimensional positioning is more stable than positioning on particular issues, and particularly, positioning on a party's secondary issues (e.g. Koedam 2021). Overall, support for the European Union (measured on a 1-7 scale going from 1, strongly opposed to 7, strongly in favor) has increased slightly from 4.72 in 1999 to 5.05 in 2019.…”

Section: Stability and Change In Eu Positionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Chapel Hill Expert Survey trend file, 1999–2019

Jolly¹,

Bakker²,

Hooghe³

et al. 2022

Electoral Studies

282

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Stability and Change In Eu Positionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Chapel Hill Expert Survey trend file, 1999–2019

Jolly¹,

Bakker²,

Hooghe³

et al. 2022

Electoral Studies

282

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…These two things need not be identical: parties may be ideologically polarized on a dimension, but not engage with this dimension in party competition. To assess the potential of such a conditional effect, we estimate a model in which two-dimensional party polarization is interacted with the electoral strength of 'second dimension' party families (see Hooghe and Marks, 2018;Koedam, 2022) as a proxy of the intensity of dimensional conflict. 11…”

Section: Party Polarization and Mass Partisanshipmentioning

confidence: 99%

Multidimensional Party Polarization in Europe: Cross-Cutting Divides and Effective Dimensionality

Koedam¹,

Binding²,

Steenbergen³

2023

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ideological polarization matters. It is a necessary requirement for meaningful electoral competition, but at its extreme can strain democratic functioning. The conceptualization and measurement of contemporary ideological polarization is complicated by the growing complexity of the policy differences between political parties. Yet, existing indicators remain one-dimensional in nature, despite the wide acceptance of the multidimensional structure of European politics. To resolve this tension, we introduce a novel, two-dimensional measure of party polarization. Using the correlation matrix of parties’ ideological positions, we calculate the effective dimensionality of a political space, which accounts for the degree to which the dimensions crosscut each other. We highlight the advantages of this approach with both artificial data and positional estimates derived from the Chapel Hill Expert Survey (1999-2019). Then, we explore the empirical implications of our multidimensional measurement strategy, and show that it is better suited to capture the relationship between party polarization and mass partisanship. This study has important theoreti- cal, methodological, and normative implications for our understanding of democratic representation in a changing political landscape.

show abstract

“…Listening to interest groups can hence help parties become more attuned to the interests of the specific constituencies they want to appeal to. In a second step, however, it is likely important for parties to frame the interest group input they listen to in a way that is consistent with their broader ideological profile to promote their agenda at large and in order not to repel their core constituents (see also Koedam, 2021).…”

Section: Theorymentioning

confidence: 99%

When do political parties listen to interest groups?

Røed

2022

Party Politics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper examines when parties listen to interest groups and adopt their input. Interest group information can help parties bolster their positions, and by taking their input into account, parties show that they are responsive to the groups’ interests which can increase their appeal to their constituents. Listening to interest groups can, however, also repel voters who disagree with the groups’ positions. This paper argues that party and issue-level characteristics affect whether the benefits of listening to interest groups exceed the costs. Examining more than 25,000 party-interest group observations on 88 Norwegian policy proposals and using a text reuse approach to measure interest group influence, the findings indicate that public salience, party issue emphasis, interest group coalitions, and government status affect parties’ propensity to listen. This implies that interest groups can be a pertinent source of information for parties under certain circumstances which affects the link between voters and parties.

show abstract

A change of heart? Analysing stability and change in European party positions

Cited by 22 publications

References 60 publications

Chapel Hill Expert Survey trend file, 1999–2019

Chapel Hill Expert Survey trend file, 1999–2019

Multidimensional Party Polarization in Europe: Cross-Cutting Divides and Effective Dimensionality

When do political parties listen to interest groups?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About