Europeans and the Nation State

Martinotti, Giovanni; Stefanizzi, Sonia

doi:10.1093/019829476x.003.0008

Cited by 34 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 66 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…While more knowledgeable citizens have a greater store of EU information available, less knowledgeable citizens tend to use evaluations of national governments (Karp et al 2003;Martinotti and Stefanizzi 1995). This is in line with theories of survey item response: citizens' responses to survey questions are based on the most salient and immediate considerations available (Zaller 1992: 49-51).…”

Section: Satisfaction With National Democracymentioning

confidence: 85%

“…By attributing losses or benefits to the European level, they evaluate whether European institutions are working satisfactorily (Kritzinger 2003). Other scholars regard the nation-state as the central factor influencing public opinion about the supranational level (Anderson 1998;Janssen 1991;Martinotti and Stefanizzi 1995). Lack of interest, knowledge or information (Anderson 1998;Bennett 1996;Meyer,1999) prevents people from developing opinions specifically regarding the EU.…”

Section: Antecedents Of Democratic Performance Evaluations In the Eumentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

‘Second-order’ institutions: national institutional quality as a yardstick for EU evaluation

Desmet¹,

Spanje²,

Vreese³

2012

Journal of European Public Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The extent to which democracy functions successfully in the European Union is a hotly debated issue. Some citizens feel that EU democracy functions well as it is, whereas others perceive a democratic deficit. Which factors contribute to this variation in opinion? In this paper, we focus on the effect that the quality of national institutions has on citizens' perceptions of the democratic performance of the EU. From voter survey data from 21 EU member states (N ¼ 32410), we find that better quality national institutions correlate to lower rates of satisfaction with the EU's democratic performance. In addition, this effect is stronger amongst citizens who are more knowledgeable about national politics. We conclude by discussing the implications of our findings for our research field in particular and for society in general.

show abstract

Section: Satisfaction With National Democracymentioning

confidence: 85%

Section: Antecedents Of Democratic Performance Evaluations In the Eumentioning

confidence: 99%

‘Second-order’ institutions: national institutional quality as a yardstick for EU evaluation

Desmet¹,

Spanje²,

Vreese³

2012

Journal of European Public Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Many authors have answered that not only are they important, they obscure the individuallevel variation and may be thought to be developed in the national level context (Deflem and Pampel 1996;Kritzinger 2003). Several works have presented evidence that popular perceptions of the EU are conditioned by national institutional factors (Anderson 1998;Martinotti and Stefanizzi 1995;Norris 1999;Sánchez-Cuenca 2000;Rohrschneider 2002). The most fertile branch of this argument has been that individuals' evaluation of the EU depends on the nation-state performance.…”

Section: Institutions and Institutional Performancementioning

confidence: 99%

Public perceptions of the EU as a system of governance

Loveless¹,

Rohrschneider²

2011

Living Rev. Euro. Gov.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Since its inception, the European Union has stimulated many vigorous debates. This Living Review provides a state of the field perspective on the academic work that has been done to address the question of the perceptions of the European Union as a system of governance. It takes a broad scope in assessing the efforts of scholars and highlights significant theoretical and empirical contributions as well as identifying potential avenues for research. In order to understand perceptions of the EU, scholars have employed national-level frameworks of popular support, particularly partisanship and instrumental self-interest. As the number of members has increased, further research has taken a broader scope to include national identity, institutions, and attitudes regarding the normative and empirical function of both national and EU institutions. Additional works address political intermediaries such as parties, media, and elites. Finally, all of the works are fundamentally concerned with the supportive popular sentiment that underpins the EU's legitimacy as a political institution. While there are far more works that can be practically included in this review, we have attempted to construct an overview based on the dimensions that define this research as set out by significant contributions at the core of this literature.

show abstract

“…Many authors have answered that not only are they important, they obscure the individuallevel variation and may be thought to be developed in the national level context (Deflem and Pampel 1996;Kritzinger 2003). Several works have presented evidence that popular perceptions of the EU are conditioned by national institutional factors (Anderson 1998;Martinotti and Stefanizzi 1995;Sánchez-Cuenca 2000;Rohrschneider 2002). The most fertile branch of this argument has been that individuals' evaluation of the EU depends on the nation-state performance.…”

Section: Institutions and Institutional Performancementioning

confidence: 99%

Public perceptions of the EU as a system of governance

Loveless¹,

Rohrschneider²

2008

Living Rev. Euro. Gov.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Since its inception, the European Union has stimulated many vigorous debates. This Living Review provides a state of the field perspective on the academic work that has been done to address the question of the perceptions of the European Union as a system of governance. It takes a broad scope in assessing the efforts of scholars and highlights significant theoretical and empirical contributions as well as identifying potential avenues for research. In order to understand perceptions of the EU, scholars have employed national-level frameworks of popular support, particularly partisanship and instrumental self-interest. As the number of members has increased, further research has taken a broader scope to include national identity, institutions, and attitudes regarding the normative and empirical function of both national and EU institutions. Additional works address political intermediaries such as parties, media, and elites. Finally, all of the works are fundamentally concerned with the supportive popular sentiment that underpins the EU's legitimacy as a political institution. While there are far more works that can be practically included in this Living Review, we have attempted to construct an overview based on the dimensions that define this research as set out by significant contributions at the core of this literature. How to cite this articleOwing to the fact that a Living Reviews article can evolve over time, we recommend to cite the article as follows:Matthew Loveless and Robert Rohrschneider, "Public perceptions of the EU as a system of governance", Living Rev.

show abstract

Europeans and the Nation State

Cited by 34 publications

References 66 publications

‘Second-order’ institutions: national institutional quality as a yardstick for EU evaluation

‘Second-order’ institutions: national institutional quality as a yardstick for EU evaluation

Public perceptions of the EU as a system of governance

Public perceptions of the EU as a system of governance

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About