Who is afraid of a change? Ideological differences in support for the status quo in direct democracy

Morisi, Davide; Colombo, Céline; Angelis, Andrea De

doi:10.1080/17457289.2019.1698048

Cited by 9 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 47 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This hypothesis is consistent with Eckles et al’s (2014) findings that (a) conservatives were less tolerant of risk than liberals and (b) people who were less tolerant of risk were more likely to favor incumbents over challengers. It is also consistent with recent work showing that right-wing voters were less likely than left-wing voters to support a constitutional reform when it was framed as changing the status quo (Morisi, Colombo, & De Angelis, 2019). 2…”

Section: Motivated Preferences To Maintain the Status Quosupporting

confidence: 90%

“…In general, citizens clearly display a preference for electoral incumbents, but our research shows that politically conservative citizens manifest even stronger preferences than others for the status quo. Thus, we appear to have identified yet another meaningful ideological asymmetry in political behavior (see also Jost, 2017; Morisi, Jost, & Singh, 2019). From the perspective of system justification theory, incumbency biases may be linked to underlying differences in psychological needs to manage uncertainty, threat, and social conformity (Hennes et al, 2012; Jost, 2020).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 73%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Is There an Ideological Asymmetry in the Incumbency Effect? Evidence From U.S. Congressional Elections

Morisi

Jost

Panagopoulos

et al. 2021

Social Psychological and Personality Science

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The electoral advantage that incumbent legislators enjoy over challengers in the U.S. Congress has been investigated extensively in political science. Very few studies, however, have considered the role of individual differences when it comes to incumbency preferences among voters. Based on theory and research in political psychology, we hypothesized that political conservatives would exhibit stronger preferences than liberals for incumbents over challengers from the same party. Extensive analyses based on more than 150,000 voters from seven election cycles in the United States from 2006 to 2018 support this hypothesis. A significant effect of conservatism on incumbency preferences was observed in the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives, and it was not attributable to Republican Party identification. This ideological asymmetry is consistent with system justification theory and prior research linking conservatism to risk aversion and status quo bias. Practical implications and directions for future research are discussed.

show abstract

Section: Motivated Preferences To Maintain the Status Quosupporting

confidence: 90%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 73%

Is There an Ideological Asymmetry in the Incumbency Effect? Evidence From U.S. Congressional Elections

Morisi

Jost

Panagopoulos

et al. 2021

Social Psychological and Personality Science

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Many members of advantaged groups are highly supportive of egalitarian reforms, and some members of disadvantaged groups are not. This is because individuals and groups differ in the ideological motivation to defend versus challenge the societal status quo (Jost, 2020(Jost, , 2021; see also García-Sánchez et al, 2019;Grossmann & Thaler, 2018;Mikołajczak et al, 2022;Morisi et al, 2021Morisi et al, , 2022Osborne et al, 2019). This is the starting point of system justification theory, which helps to explain within-group variation in policy backlash.…”

Section: Policy Backlash From the Perspective Of System Justification...mentioning

confidence: 99%

System justification motivation as a source of backlash against equality‐promoting policies—and what to do about it

Liaquat

Jost

Balcetis

2023

Social Issues Policy Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

One of the most pressing tasks facing policymakers in the 21st century is reducing stark group‐based inequalities that have developed within many societies because of centuries of structural discrimination. However, efforts to redress group disparities through equality‐promoting policies are frequently met with policy backlash and countermobilization. We describe several social psychological contributors to policy backlash, distinguishing between identity‐based and ideology‐based processes. While the role of identity politics in driving support and opposition to policies pertaining to race, gender, and sexual orientation is well‐known, less attention has been given to the role of ideological motivation, including individual and group differences in system justification tendencies to defend and bolster the societal status quo. In this article, we develop a framework based on system justification theory to understand why backlash against equality‐promoting policies occurs, when such backlash is most likely to occur, and who is most likely to be countermobilized against such policies. From this perspective, policy backlash is motivated not only by the desire on the part of advantaged group members to maintain their own existing privileges but also by the broader desire to maintain the perceived legitimacy and stability of the overarching social system. We make recommendations about how leaders can develop and communicate about equality‐promoting policies in a way that reduces the likelihood of backlash due to system justification motivation.

show abstract

“…First, citizens may follow the position of their preferred political party. Political parties provide cues to their voters that can use them as decision heuristic (Colombo 2016, Colombo 2018De Angelis et al 2020;Kleider and Stoeckel 2019;Kriesi 2005;Morisi et al 2021;Pannico 2017;Pannico 2020;Steenbergen et al 2007; see also Boudreau and MacKenzie 2014;Lupia and Matsusaka 2004). This can be a case of 'cold cognition' where citizens use a heuristic to take decisions that they believe to be in their interest.…”

Section: Hypothesis 1 Preferring Immigration Restrictions Over Eu Mar...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Citizens’ response to a non-responsive government: the case of the Swiss Initiative on Mass Immigration

Armingeon

Lutz

2022

Comp Eur Polit

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In times of contested globalization, democratic governments have increasing difficulties to reconcile international obligations with domestic political demands. Unresponsiveness to domestic constituents due to international constraints may threaten to undermine democratic legitimacy. We assess how citizens react to non-responsive governments in the case of a high-stake direct-democratic vote in Switzerland. The 2014 referendum on restricting immigration from the European Union failed in its implementation because of the EU's refusal to negotiate the free movement rights of its citizens. How did Swiss citizens adapt their policy preferences to this implementation failure? Drawing on original survey data, we show that citizens overwhelmingly did not adapt their policy preferences; rather, they rationalized the implementation failure in an effort to protect their ideological and partisan orientations. The results suggests that governments face major challenges to convey constrained policy choices to their citizens.

show abstract

Who is afraid of a change? Ideological differences in support for the status quo in direct democracy

Cited by 9 publications

References 47 publications

Is There an Ideological Asymmetry in the Incumbency Effect? Evidence From U.S. Congressional Elections

Is There an Ideological Asymmetry in the Incumbency Effect? Evidence From U.S. Congressional Elections

System justification motivation as a source of backlash against equality‐promoting policies—and what to do about it

Citizens’ response to a non-responsive government: the case of the Swiss Initiative on Mass Immigration

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About