Winning and Competitiveness as Determinants of Political Support<sup>*</sup>

Singh, Shane P.; Lago, Ignacio; Blais, André

doi:10.1111/j.1540-6237.2011.00788.x

Cited by 72 publications

(51 citation statements)

References 22 publications

(19 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Things are admittedly not that simple. A number of researchers have shown that adherents of winning candidates are more positive toward government on a range of items—including political trust—than adherents of losing candidates because “people who cast their vote for the winner are more inclined to believe that the collective decision was a wise one and that the system is working just fine” (Singh, Lago, and Blais, :695). For instance, using aggregate‐level ANES data from 1964 to 2004 and from Florida for 2001, Craig and his co‐authors () conclude that supporters of losers are less trusting than supporters of winners, are less likely to see government as responsible, and are less likely to say they are satisfied with democracy.…”

Section: Related Literature and Hypothesesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing the Stability of Trust in Government Across Election Periods*

Dabros

Parker

Petersen

2015

Social Science Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective. Past research shows that electoral context prompts changes in political trust. In the United States, data limitations confine this literature to status-quo affirming presidential elections. We extend previous research to unexamined contexts: elections with partisan presidential changes, midterm elections with shifts in congressional control, and nonelection periods. Method. Original panel data from 2004Original panel data from , 2005Original panel data from , 2008Original panel data from , 2010Original panel data from , and 2012 are used. Data were obtained from surveys administered to students enrolled at a large midwestern university. We compare context effects on trust and other political attitudes, and contrast trust levels among winners and losers in each context. Results. We find that trust is more malleable than most other attitudes in all periods; it is less stable in presidential elections than congressional elections; and there is no evidence of winner and loser effects. Conclusion. Our findings reveal the importance of political context in explaining the stability of trust by showing that trust levels are more changeable in certain contexts than others, specifically more changeable in presidential than in congressional elections. This article examines individual-level changes in political trust occurring in different U.S. electoral contexts. Scholars have long recognized that the political environment could affect citizen support for the political system-a concept also known as trust in government and generally measured by a question asking the degree to which the respondent trusts the federal government to do what is right (see Miller, 1974;Citrin, 1974 for a discussion of the meaning of the American National Election Studies [ANES] trust in government questions). Research examining the stability of trust across election periods has been limited, however, because the data necessary to identify whether election results reduce the support that people feel for the political system generally, or the federal government specifically, do not exist nationally. The ANES included pre-and postelection measures of trust in their 1972 and 1996 panel surveys, but the outcomes of these elections were identical in that they affirmed the status quo (an incumbent president serving under divided government). The ANES have not gathered panel data on trust in government at any other time, nor have other national surveys, and this has inhibited the specification of changes in trust brought about by political context, such as electoral outcomes that bring significant partisan changes to the presidency, Congress, or both branches.

show abstract

Section: Related Literature and Hypothesesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing the Stability of Trust in Government Across Election Periods*

Dabros

Parker

Petersen

2015

Social Science Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This idea that egocentric congruence might be positively related to citizen satisfaction has already found some empirical support (Brandenburg and Johns 2014;Kim 2009;Dahlberg and Holmberg 2014;Curini et al 2012; though for a contrary view see Singh et al 2011). …”

Section: Does Congruence Matter?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Ideological Congruence and Citizen Satisfaction: Evidence From 25 Advanced Democracies

Mayne

Hakhverdian

2016

Comparative Political Studies

106

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ideological congruence is an important and popular measure of the quality of political representation. The closer the match between the preferences of the public and those of elected elites, the better representative democracy is thought to function. Relatively little attention has been paid however to the effects of ideological congruence on political judgement. We address this gap by examining whether citizens use egocentric or sociotropic judgments of congruence to evaluate democratic performance. Using a variety of congruence measures, we find that citizens are unmoved by sociotropic congruence; however, our analyses provide clear evidence that egocentric congruence boosts citizen satisfaction, especially among political sophisticates. We conclude by discussing the implications of these findings for the study of ideological congruence and political representation.1 Earlier versions of this paper were presented at annual conferences of the Midwest Political Science Association and the Dutch Political Science Association as well as a workshop at the University of Gothenburg. We thank the discussants and panel participants at these meetings for their feedback. We also thank Wouter Schakel for data assistance. We are grateful for the thoughtful comments of our reviewers as well as 2Over the years ideological congruence has become an important and popular concept in the study of political representation (Huber and Powell 1994;Powell 2000 Powell , 2009McDonald et al. 2004;Klingemann et al. 2006;Griffin and Newman 2008;Golder and Stramski 2010). Third, in addition to testing for the direct effects of various measures of ideological congruence on citizen satisfaction we investigate whether the effects of congruence are contingent upon a person's political sophistication. While a positive relationship between representative congruence and citizen satisfaction seems plausible in the abstract, it is also possible that, given its potential complexity and concomitant inscrutability as a feature of the political environment, congruence -whether egocentric or sociotropic -may in reality only affect those capable of ascertaining its presence and degree.In the end our analyses provide no evidence that variations in sociotropic congruence are related to how citizens think about the general working of their political system. None of the 4 sociotropic measures is found to impact citizen satisfaction, even among political sophisticates. In contrast, we find clear evidence that egocentric congruence matters for citizen satisfaction. In addition, political sophistication moderates the relationship between egocentric congruence and citizen satisfaction. Specifically, egocentric congruence boosts the chances of satisfaction more among citizens with the highest levels of political sophistication.In the next section we elaborate on the concept of ideological congruence as one aspect of political representation that citizens might take into account when evaluating democratic performance. We then introduce the distinction bet...

show abstract

“…We also include a variable that measures whether individuals voted for the party that won the elections. It is a well-settled conclusion in the literature that satisfaction with democracy is partly affected by electoral outcomes: individuals tend to be more satisfied with the way democracy works when it produces the electoral outcomes that they prefer (Anderson & Guillory, 1997;Nadeau & Blais, 1993;Blais & Gélineau, 2007;Singh, Lago & Blais, 2011). Our control variable takes value 1 when the individual voted for the winning party and value 0 otherwise.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ballot Structure and Satisfaction with Democracy

Bosch¹,

Orriols²

2014

Journal of Elections, Public Opinion and Parties

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper analyzes the influence of ballot structure over satisfaction with democracy. In line with previous literature, we hypothesize that some ballot structures -such as preferential ballots -generate more satisfaction with democracy than closed ones. Yet, we expect these differences to be especially relevant among the more knowledgeable electorate, since any open ballot structure requires more sophisticated voters. Using CSES surveys, our results do not show a clear and parsimonious relation between ballot openness and satisfaction with democracy as some previous research seems to suggest. Our findings rather suggest that is preferential ballots and open lists the only ballot structures that generate more satisfaction than most of the remaining ballot structures. Yet, this relation is restricted only among the more knowledgeable electorate. The liberty of choice that ballot structure offers only concerns a reduced portion of the electorate, namely the more politically sophisticated one.

show abstract

Winning and Competitiveness as Determinants of Political Support^*

Cited by 72 publications

References 22 publications

Assessing the Stability of Trust in Government Across Election Periods*

Assessing the Stability of Trust in Government Across Election Periods*

Ideological Congruence and Citizen Satisfaction: Evidence From 25 Advanced Democracies

Ballot Structure and Satisfaction with Democracy

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Winning and Competitiveness as Determinants of Political Support*

Cited by 72 publications

References 22 publications

Assessing the Stability of Trust in Government Across Election Periods*

Assessing the Stability of Trust in Government Across Election Periods*

Ideological Congruence and Citizen Satisfaction: Evidence From 25 Advanced Democracies

Ballot Structure and Satisfaction with Democracy

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Winning and Competitiveness as Determinants of Political Support^*