The winner-loser satisfaction gap in the absence of a clear outcome

Halliez, Adrien A.; Thornton, Judd R.

doi:10.1177/13540688211058111

Cited by 10 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 72 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The statistically insignificant results for the 2000 election could be explained by the delayed announcement of the outcome ( Halliez and Thornton 2022 ). Although there is little doubt that the recount dispute in Florida and Al Gore’s defeat, despite being the popular vote winner, were important sources of discontent among Democratic voters, the 2000 ANES post-election survey (which asked respondents to rate the fairness of the electoral process) was in the field for a period of several weeks during which no president-elect had been named, which might have been a cause of confusion or uncertainty among voters.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Suspicious Minds: Unexpected Election Outcomes, Perceived Electoral Integrity and Satisfaction With Democracy in American Presidential Elections

Mongrain

2023

Political Research Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A great amount of research has noted the existence of a gap between election winners and losers in relation to perceptions of electoral fairness and satisfaction with democracy. One aspect of the winner–loser gap that has been overlooked is the impact of citizens’ expectations about election outcomes on these attitudes. More precisely, how do citizens react to unexpected defeats and victories? Are individuals on the losing side less critical of the electoral process or dissatisfied with democracy when they recognize beforehand that their favourite party or candidate was likely to be defeated? Does experiencing a surprise victory lead to a boost in perceived electoral integrity or democratic satisfaction? To answer these questions, I use data from the 1996, 2000, 2004, 2012, 2016 and 2020 ANES. While there is little evidence that expectations exert a major influence on post-election attitudes, outcome unexpectedness seems to have decreased confidence in the vote counting process among losers, independents and even winners in the 2020 election. The results show the considerable influence that fraud claims and conspiracy theories can have on public opinion when elected officials and candidates push a consistent story line of electoral malfeasance and corruption in an effort to denigrate political opponents.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Suspicious Minds: Unexpected Election Outcomes, Perceived Electoral Integrity and Satisfaction With Democracy in American Presidential Elections

Mongrain

2023

Political Research Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For example, the winner-loser gap in SWD tends to be larger in majoritarian than in proportional systems, arguably due to the sharper distinction between winners and losers in their access to power (Anderson and Guillory 1997;Martini and Quaranta 2019). Conversely, the gap tends to blur in elections where the winner is not immediately clear, such as in conditions of uncertainty or high fragmentation (Halliez and Thornton 2022;Kostelka and Blais 2018).…”

Section: Elections Radical Parties and Swdmentioning

confidence: 99%

Blinded by Out-group Hatred. Why does Radical Party Entry Reduce its Voters’ Satisfaction with Democracy?

Canalejo-Molero,

Le Corre Juratic

2024

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper examines why the electoral breakthrough of radical parties further reinforces democratic dissatisfaction among their voters. Against the prevailing utilitarian framework, we argue that an affective response to the out-group instead of the in-group party results better explains changes in democratic evaluations under growing affective polarization. To evaluate our theory, we combine observational, experimental and qualitative evidence from a sample of Éric Zemmour voters, the emerging radical right candidate who disrupted the 2022 French elections. Our findings confirm that Zemmour voters became the least satisfied with democracy after the elections and provide evidence of a negative affective response to the out-group (Macron) win as the driving mechanism. The qualitative analysis confirms the causal path from negative feelings toward the winner to questioning the democratic system. Contrary to representation theories, our paper suggests that the institutional inclusion of marginalized political groups may only exacerbate dissatisfaction in highly polarized electoral contexts.

show abstract

“…Second, empirically, most studies rely on cross‐sectional data (or repeated cross‐sectional data, e.g., Loveless, 2021; Nemčok & Wass, 2021). There are a few panel studies that survey respondents in the months directly before and after an election (e.g., Banducci & Karp, 2003; Blais et al, 2017; Blais & Gélineau, 2007; Daoust et al, 2021; Davis & Hitt, 2016; Gärtner et al, 2020; Hollander, 2014; Singh et al, 2012; van der Meer & Steenvoorden, 2018), after a longer time span following the election (Halliez & Thornton, 2022; Hansen et al, 2019) or over an entire electoral cycle (Dahlberg & Linde, 2017). However, these panel studies do not span over several electoral cycles where different governments were in office, only measure differences between winners and losers of elections instead of more policy‐oriented measures of representation by the government such as the ideological distance and only focus on satisfaction with the functioning of democracy as the dependent variable.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Political support through representation by the government. Evidence from Dutch panel data

Erhardt

2023

Swiss Political Sci Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research on political support demonstrates that satisfaction with democracy is higher among electoral winners than losers, and that it is higher for citizens who are ideologically more congruent with the government. In this paper, I analyze how support for the political system is affected by representation by the government. Expanding on previous studies, I leverage long‐run panel data from the Dutch LISS panel spanning over several electoral cycles. Drawing on various measures that go beyond the distinction between election winners and losers and also measure how close citizens are to the government coalition as a whole, I show that being well represented by the government has a wide‐ranging positive relationship with satisfaction with democracy, external efficacy and trust in political institutions. While this relationship is mostly short‐run, political support can decline substantially if non‐representation persists in the long‐run. This highlights the relevance of long‐run panel data for studying the consequences of representation.

show abstract

The winner-loser satisfaction gap in the absence of a clear outcome

Cited by 10 publications

References 72 publications

Suspicious Minds: Unexpected Election Outcomes, Perceived Electoral Integrity and Satisfaction With Democracy in American Presidential Elections

Suspicious Minds: Unexpected Election Outcomes, Perceived Electoral Integrity and Satisfaction With Democracy in American Presidential Elections

Blinded by Out-group Hatred. Why does Radical Party Entry Reduce its Voters’ Satisfaction with Democracy?

Political support through representation by the government. Evidence from Dutch panel data

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About