Skip to main content
×
×
Home

Elections Activate Partisanship across Countries

  • SHANE P. SINGH (a1) and JUDD R. THORNTON (a2)
Abstract

It has long been argued that elections amplify partisan predispositions. We take advantage of the timing of the cross-national post-election surveys included in the Comparative Study of Electoral Systems to explore the effects that elections have on individuals’ attachments to political parties. Within these surveys, under the assumption that the dates on which respondents are interviewed are assigned independent of factors known to affect partisanship, we are able to identify the causal effects of election salience on partisan attachments. We find strong evidence that election salience increases the probability of one having a party attachment, increases the strength of attachments, and heightens the relationship between partisanship and evaluations of political actors. Empirical explorations of our identifying assumption bolster its validity. Our results substantiate the causal role that elections play in activating partisanship.

Copyright
Corresponding author
*Shane P. Singh, Department of International Affairs, University of Georgia, singh@uga.edu.
Judd R. Thornton, Department of Political Science, Georgia State University, jrthornton@gsu.edu.
Footnotes
Hide All

Previous versions of this paper were presented at the 2017 Meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association and at a workshop of the Making Electoral Democracy Work project that took place in conjunction with the 2017 Meeting of the American Political Science Association. We thank Indridi Indridason and Jamie Monogan for especially helpful comments. We also gratefully acknowledge the Comparative Study of Electoral Systems for making the data available. Replication materials can be found on Dataverse at: https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/03CDTK.

Footnotes
References
Hide All
Adams, James, Green, Jane, and Milazzo, Caitlin. 2012. “Has the British Public Depolarized along with Political Elites? An American Perspective on British Public Opinion.” Comparative Political Studies 45 (4): 507–30.
Aldrich, John H., Schober, Gregory S., Ley, Sandra, and Fernandez, Marco. 2018. “Incognizance and Perceptual Deviation: Individual and Institutional Sources of Variation in Citizens’ Perceptions of Party Placements on the Left–Right Scale.” Political Behavior 40 (2): 415–33.
Allsop, Dee, and Weisberg, Herbert. 1988. “Measuring Change in Party Identification.” American Journal of Political Science 32 (4): 9961017.
Banducci, Susan, and Stevens, Daniel. 2015. “Surveys in Context: How Timing in the Electoral Cycle Influences Response Propensity and Satisficing.” Public Opinion Quarterly 79 (S1): 214–43.
Bankert, Alexa, Huddy, Leonie, and Rosema, Martin. 2017. “Measuring Partisanship as a Social Identity in Multi-Party Systems.” Political Behavior 39 (1): 103–32.
Bartels, Brandon L., Box-Steffensmeier, Janet M., Smidt, Corwin D., and Smith, Renée M.. 2011. “The Dynamic Properties of Individual-Level Party Identification in the United States.” Electoral Studies 30 (1): 210–22.
Bartels, Larry M. 2006. “Priming and Persuasion in Presidential Campaigns”. In Capturing Campaign Effects, eds. Brady, Henry E. and Johnston, Richard. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press, 78112.
Berelson, Bernard R., Lazarsfeld, Paul F., and McPhee, William N.. 1954. Voting: A Study of Opinion Formation in a Presidential Campaign. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Bowler, Shaun, Lanoue, David J., and Savoie, Paul. 1994. “Electoral Systems, Party Competition, and Strength of Partisan Attachment: Evidence from Three Countries.” The Journal of Politics 56 (04): 9911007.
Brody, Richard A., and Rothenberg, Lawrence S.. 1988. “The Instability of Partisanship: An Analysis of the 1980 Presidential Election.” British Journal of Political Science 18 (04): 445–65.
Campbell, James E. 2000. The American Campaign: U.S. Presidential Campaigns and the National Vote. College Station, TX: Texas A&M University Press.
Claggett, William. 1981. “Partisan Acquisition versus Partisan Intensity: Life-Cycle, Generation, and Period Effects, 1952–1976.” American Journal of Political Science 25 (2): 193214.
The Comparative Study of Electoral Systems (www.cses.org). CSES MODULE 1 FULL RELEASE [dataset]. August 4, 2003 version.
The Comparative Study of Electoral Systems (www.cses.org). CSES MODULE 2 FULL RELEASE [dataset]. June 27, 2007 version.
The Comparative Study of Electoral Systems (www.cses.org). CSES MODULE 3 FULL RELEASE [dataset]. March 27, 2013 version.
Dalton, Russell J., and Wattenberg, Martin P.. 2002. Parties without Partisans: Political Change in Advanced Industrial Democracies. New York: Oxford University Press on Demand.
Dassonneville, Ruth, and Hooghe, Marc. 2018. “Indifference and Alienation: Diverging Dimensions of Electoral Dealignment in Europe.” Acta Politica 53 (1): 123.
Dunning, Thad. 2008. “Improving Causal Inference: Strengths and Limitations of Natural Experiments.” Political Research Quarterly 61 (2): 282–93.
Gelman, Andrew, and King, Gary. 1993. “Why are American Presidential Elections Campaign Polls So Variable when Votes are So Predictable.” British Journal of Political Science 23 (4): 409–51.
Gelman, Andrew, Goel, Sharad, Rivers, Douglas, and Rothschild, David. 2016. “The Mythical Swing Voter.” Quarterly Journal of Political Science 11 (1): 103–30.
Gerber, Alan S., Huber, Gregory A., and Washington, Ebonya. 2010. “Party Affiliation, Partisanship, and Political Beliefs: A Field Experiment.” American Political Science Review 104 (4): 720–44.
Gerring, John, Thacker, Strom C., and Moreno, Carola. 2009. “Are Parliamentary Systems Better?Comparative Political Studies 42 (3): 327–59.
Gopoian, J. David, and Hadjiharalambous, Sissie. 1994. “Late-Deciding Voters in Presidential Elections.” Political Behavior 16 (1): 5578.
Grant, J. Tobin, Mockabee, Stephen T., and Monson, J. Quin. 2010. “Campaign Effects on the Accessibility of Party Identification.” Political Research Quarterly 63 (4): 811–21.
Hetherington, Marc J. 2001. “Resurgent Mass Partisanship: The Role of Elite Polarization.” American Political Science Review 95 (3): 619–31.
Holbrook, Thomas. 1996. Do Campaigns Matter? Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Holmberg, Sören. 2007. “Partisanship Reconsidered.” In The Oxford Handbook of Political Behavior, eds. Dalton, Russell J. and Klingemann, Hans-Dieter. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 557–70.
Huber, John, Kernell, Georgia, and Leoni, Eduardo. 2005. “Institutional Context, Cognitive Resources and Party Attachments across Democracies.” Political Analysis 13: 365–86.
Huckfeldt, Robert, Sprague, John, and Levine, Jeffrey. 2000. “The Dynamics of Collective Deliberation in the 1996 Election: Campaign Effects on Accessibility, Certainty, and Accuracy.” American Political Science Review 95 (3): 641–51.
Iyengar, Shanto, and Simon, Adam F.. 2000. “New Perspectives and Evidence on Political Communication and Campaign Effects.” Annual Review of Psychology 51 (1): 149–69.
Karp, Jeffrey A., and Banducci, Susan A.. 2008. “Political Efficacy and Participation in Twenty-Seven Democracies: How Electoral Systems Shape Political Behavior.” British Journal of Political Science 38 (02): 311–34.
Katz, Richard S. 1980. A Theory of Parties and Electoral Systems. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
Lazarsfeld, Paul F., Berelson, Bernard R., and Gaudet, Hazel. 1944. The People’s Choice: How the Voter Makes up His Mind in a Presidential Campaign. New York: Duell, Sloan and Pearce.
Lupu, Noam. 2015. “Party Polarization and Mass Partisanship: A Comparative Perspective.” Political Behavior 37 (2): 331–56.
Miller, Joanne M., and Peterson, David A. M.. 2004. “Theoretical and Empirical Implications of Attitude Strength.” Journal of Politics 66 (3): 847–67.
Miller, Warren, and Shanks, J. Merrill. 1982. “Policy Directions and Presidential Leadership: Alternative Interpretations of the 1980 Presidential Elections.” British Journal of Political Science 12 (2): 266356.
Peterson, David A. M. 2014. “Uncertainty and Campaigns: The Psychological Mechanism Behind Campaign-Induced Priming.” American Politics Research 43 (1): 109–43.
Rudolph, Thomas J. 2011. “The Dynamics of Ambivalence.” American Journal of Political Science 55 (3): 561–73.
Sartori, Giovanni. 1976. Parties and Party Systems: A Framework for Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Schmitt, Hermann. 2009. Partisanship in Nine Western Democracies: Causes and Consequences. In Political Parties and Partisanship: Social Identity and Individual Attitudes, eds. Bartles, John and Bellucci, Paolo. New York: Routledge, 7587.
Schmitt, Hermann, and Holmberg, Sören. 1995. Political Parties in Decline? Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Sekhon, Jasjeet S., and Titiunik, Roco. 2012. “When Natural Experiments are Neither Natural nor Experiments.” American Political Science Review 106 (1): 3557.
Singh, Shane P., and Thornton, Judd. 2013. “Compulsory Voting and the Dynamics of Partisan Identification.” European Journal of Political Research 52 (2): 188211.
Stimson, James A. 2004. Tides of Consent: How Public Opinion Shapes American Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Thornton, Judd R. 2013. “The Impact of Elite Polarization on Partisan Ambivalence and Indifference.” Political Behavior 35 (2): 409–28.
Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

American Political Science Review
  • ISSN: 0003-0554
  • EISSN: 1537-5943
  • URL: /core/journals/american-political-science-review
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×
Type Description Title
UNKNOWN
Supplementary materials

Singh and Thornton Dataset
Dataset

 Unknown
PDF
Supplementary materials

Singh and Thornton supplementary material
Singh and Thornton supplementary material 1

 PDF (540 KB)
540 KB

Metrics

Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed