A global analysis of how losing an election affects voter satisfaction with democracy

Abstract

In this article, we argue that a deeper understanding of citizen satisfaction with democratic elections requires a global perspective. Regional research found that a gap in satisfaction with democracy emerges after an election, between those who supported winning parties and those that did not, and also, crucially, that this gap can be reduced under proportional electoral institutions. In this article we argue instead that these theories of the winner–loser gap actually apply to only a narrow set of countries. We use a comprehensive global dataset to show that the predictions of this theory about the effects of proportional institutions are accurate for Western Europe, but not outside it. Beyond a small cluster of established democracies in Western Europe, the electoral environment is characterized by more fundamental uncertainty. This uncertainty alters the incentives created by proportional institutions. We conclude that the winner–loser gap and ‘losers’ consent’ are concepts that vary systematically around the world. We discuss the implications of this for democratic stability.

As time goes by, the same sentiments apply? Stability of voter satisfaction with democracy during the electoral cycle in 31 countries

“…An objective of this study was to test the claim that satisfaction is a relatively stable phenomenon (Anderson et al, 2005;Dahlberg and Linde, 2017) that has been based on limited data sets collected in only a few West European countries. Moreover, such stability seemed inconsistent with the fact that trends in satisfaction seem to vary across various contexts (Aarts and Thomassen, 2008;Farrer and Zingher, 2018). To do that, we used the interview date in the ESS and positioned 199,207 individuals altogether nested in 199 surveys conducted in 31 European countries within the electoral cycle in their systems.…”

Winning and Losing Democratic Elections: Effects on Political and Social Attitudes and Subjective Well-Being

“…There is by now a large literature documenting the gap between winners and losers of elections with respect to satisfaction with democracy. The gap has been found in a variety of time periods, geographic areas and institutional contexts (Anderson et al, 2005;Blais et al, 2017;Farrer & Zingher, 2019;Loveless, 2020). Remarkably, it might be greater for men compared to women (Williams et al, 2020).…”

“…In countries that have recently transitioned to a democratic form of government, like the post-communist countries in Central and Eastern Europe, the gap in attitudes might be greater than in established democracies (Linde & Ekman, 2003). But the effect of the proximity of democratic transition seems to vary on different continents: Farrer and Zingher find a negative effect in Europe, Asia and Latin America, but a positive one in Africa (Farrer & Zingher, 2019). Other country-level characteristics might be important as well: Han and Chang find that 'satisfaction with democracy between electoral winners and losers widens as income inequality increases' (Han & Chang, 2016).…”

“…But being on the winning or the losing side of elections can lead to important changes in attitudes of citizens towards democracy and the political game. Many studies document the existence of a winner-loser gap in satisfaction with democracy (inter alia Blais et al, 2017;Farrer & Zingher, 2019;Loveless, 2020). While it is still unclear what changes open up the gap -whether it is winners increasing their satisfaction, or losers decreasing it, or both (Esaiasson, 2011;Hansen et al, 2019;van der Meer & Steenvoorden, 2018), differences between election winners and losers are found across different empirical contexts and with different research designs, including panel survey data (Bol et al, 2018;Gärtner et al, 2020).…”

“…Synthesizing the existing literature on the winners-losers gap, we hypothesize that the effects of winning or losing on political perceptions, social attitudes, life outlook and well-being should be stronger for citizens with strong attachment to a political party (Plescia, 2019;Singh, 2014), mediated by satisfaction with the current government (Blais et al, 2017), and moderated at the individual level by gender (Williams et al, 2020) and at the country level by experience with democracy (Anderson & Tverdova, 2001;Farrer & Zingher, 2019;Linde & Ekman, 2003) and the disproportionality of the electoral system (Anderson & Guillory, 1997;Davis, 2014;Farrer & Zingher, 2019;Hooghe & Stiers, 2016), which exacerbates the impact of election wins and losses.…”