Hostname: page-component-6b989bf9dc-wj8jn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-14T23:18:31.026Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Justifications and Citizen Competence in Direct Democracy: A Multilevel Analysis

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 May 2016

Céline Colombo
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The criticism that ordinary voters lack the necessary competence to make policy decisions persists despite the growth, popularity and implementation of direct democratic instruments throughout the democratic world. This article presents a novel measure of voters’ levels of justification as a possible, policy-specific, conceptualization of citizen competence in direct democracy. Using a unique dataset based on thirty-four ballot decisions in Switzerland, the study analyses the levels and correlates of citizen competence. The main findings are, first, that most voters do understand arguments about policies. Secondly, the political context as well as individual resources are important in determining voters’ competence. Finally, with regard to individual resources, motivation is strongly associated with justification levels, while the effect of ability is smaller than expected.

Type
Articles
Information
British Journal of Political Science , Volume 48 , Issue 3 , July 2018 , pp. 787 - 806
Copyright
© Cambridge University Press 2016 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

*

Department of Political Science, University of Zurich (email: colombo@ipz.uzh.ch). I am grateful to Hanspeter Kriesi, Alexander Trechsel, Thomas Milic, Marco Steenbergen, Nan Zhang, Thomas Widmer, Hannes Kröger and Igor Skulkin for their valuable comments and support. In particular, I thank Mathias Birrer for his invaluable help with data coding and his many inputs. Supplementary materials available at http://dx.doi.org/doi: 10.1017/S0007123416000090 and replication data available at https://dataverse.harvard.edu/dataverse/BJPolS.

References

REFERENCES

Althaus, Scott L. 2003. Collective Preferences in Democratic Politics: Opinion Surveys and the Will of the People. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Altman, David. 2010. Direct Democracy Worldwide. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Bächtiger, André, and Wyss, Dominik. 2013. Empirische Deliberationsforschung–eine systematische Übersicht. Zeitschrift für Vergleichende Politikwissenschaft 7 (2):155–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barabas, Jason, Jerit, Jennifer, Pollock, William, and Rainey, Carlisle. 2014. The Question(s) of Political Knowledge: A Temporal-Topical Framework. American Political Science Review 108 (4):840–854.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bauer, Paul C., and Fatke, Matthias. 2014. Direct Democracy and Political Trust: Enhancing Trust, Initiating Distrust or Both? Swiss Political Science Review 20 (1):49–69.Google Scholar
Bennett, Stephen Earl. 1988. Know-Nothings’ Revisited: The Meaning of Political Ignorance Today. Social Science Quarterly 69 (2):476–490.Google Scholar
Benz, Matthias, and Stutzer, Alois. 2004. Are Voters Better Informed when They Have a Larger Say in Politics? Evidence for the European Union and Switzerland. Public Choice 119 (1–2):31–59.Google Scholar
Bolsen, Toby, Druckman, James N., and Cook, Fay Lomax. 2014. The Influence of Partisan Motivated Reasoning on Public Opinion. Political Behavior 36 (2):235–262.Google Scholar
Boudreau, Cheryl, and MacKenzie, Scott A.. 2014. Informing the Electorate? How Party Cues and Policy Information Affect Public Opinion about Initiatives. American Journal of Political Science 58 (1):48–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bowler, Shaun, and Donovan, Todd. 2002. Democracy, Institutions and Attitudes About Citizen Influence on Government. British Journal of Political Science 32 (2):371–390.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chambers, Simone. 2001. Constitutional Referendums and Democratic Deliberation. Pp. 231–255 in Referendum Democracy: Citizens, Elites, and Deliberation in Referendum Campaigns, edited by M. Mendelson and A. Parkin. New York: Palgrave.Google Scholar
Converse, Phillip E. 1964. The Nature of Belief Systems in Mass Politics. Pp. 206–261 in Ideology and Discontent, edited by David E. Apter. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Dahl, Robert A. 1989. Democracy and its Critics. New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Delli Carpini, Michael X., and Keeter, Scott. 1996. What Americans Don’t Know about Politics and Why It Matters. New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Donovan, Todd, Tolbert, Caroline J., and Smith, Daniel A.. 2009. Political Engagement, Mobilization, and Direct Democracy. Public Opinion Quarterly 73 (1):98–118.Google Scholar
Druckman, James N., and Nelson, Kjersten R.. 2003. Framing and Deliberation: How Citizens’ Conversations Limit Elite Influence. American Journal of Political Science 47 (4):729–745.Google Scholar
Dryzek, John S. 2009. Democratization as Deliberative Capacity Building. Comparative Political Studies 42 (11):1379–1402.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elo, Kimmo, and Rapeli, Lauri. 2010. Determinants of Political Knowledge: The Effects of the Media on Knowledge and Information. Journal of Elections, Public Opinion and Parties 20 (1):133–146.Google Scholar
Esterling, Kevin M., Neblo, Michael A., and Lazer, David M. J.. 2011. Means, Motive, and Opportunity in Becoming Informed About Politics: A Deliberative Field Experiment with Members of Congress and Their Constituents. Public Opinion Quarterly 75 (3):483–503.Google Scholar
Fishkin, James. 2009. When the People Speak: Deliberative Democracy and Public Consultation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Freitag, Markus, and Stadelmann-Steffen, Isabelle. 2010. Stumbling Block or Stepping Stone? The Influence of Direct Democracy on Individual Participation in Parliamentary Elections. Electoral Studies 29 (3):472–483.Google Scholar
Gerber, Marlène, Bächtiger, André, Fiket, Irena, Steenbergen, Marco, and Steiner, Jürg. 2014. Deliberative and Non-Deliberative Persuasion: Mechanisms of Opinion Formation in EuroPolis. European Union Politics 15 (3):410–429.Google Scholar
Gilens, Martin. 2001. Political Ignorance and Collective Policy Preferences. American Political Science Review 95 (June):379–396.Google Scholar
Graber, Doris A. 2001. Processing Politics: Learning from Television in the Internet Age. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Gruner, Erich, and Hertig, Hans Peter. 1983. Der Stimmbürger und die neue Politik: Wie reagiert die Politik auf die Beschleunigung der Zeitgeschichte? Bern: Haupt.Google Scholar
Haidt, Jonathan. 2012. The Righteous Mind: Why Good People Are Divided by Politics and Religion. New York: Vintage.Google Scholar
Hirschman, Albert O. 1989. Having Opinions – One of the Elements of Well-Being? American Economic Review 79 (2):75–79.Google Scholar
Jerit, Jennifer, Barabas, Jason, and Bolsen, Toby. 2006. Citizens, Knowledge, and the Information Environment. American Journal of Political Science 50 (2):266–282.Google Scholar
Kriesi, Hanspeter. 2002. Individual Opinion Formation in a Direct Democratic Campaign. British Journal of Political Science 32 (1):171–185.Google Scholar
Kriesi, Hanspeter. 2005. Direct Democratic Choice: The Swiss Experience. Lanham, Md.: Lexington Books.Google Scholar
Kriesi, Hanspeter. 2010. Manipulation or Deliberation, unpublished manuscript, University of Zurich.Google Scholar
Krosnick, Jon A. 1990. Government Policy and Citizen Passion: A Study of Issue Publics in Contemporary America. Political Behavior 12 (1):59–92.Google Scholar
Kuklinski, James H., Quirk, Paul J., Schwieder, David W., and Rich, Robert F.. 1998. Just the Facts, Ma’am: Political Facts and Public Opinion. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 560 (November):143–154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kuklinski, James H., Quirk, Paul J., Jerit, Jennifer, and Rich, Robert F.. 2001. The Political Environment and Citizen Competence. American Journal of Political Science 45 (2):410–424.Google Scholar
Lau, Richard R., and Heldman, Caroline. 2009. Self Interest, Symbolic Attitudes, and Support for Public Policy: A Multilevel Analysis. Political Psychology 30 (4):513–537.Google Scholar
Lavine, Howard G., Johnston, Christopher D., and Steenbergen, Marco R.. 2012. The Ambivalent Partisan: How Critical Loyalty Promotes Democracy . Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Lodge, Milton, and Taber, Charles S.. 2013. The Rationalizing Voter. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lupia, Arthur. 2006. How Elitism Undermines the Study of Voter Competence. Critical Review 18 (1–3):217–232.Google Scholar
Lupia, Arthur, McCubbins, Mathew D., and Popkin, Samuel, eds. 2000. Elements of Reason: Cognition, Choice, and the Bounds of Rationality. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Magleby, David B. 1984. Direct Legislation: Voting on Ballot Propositions in the United States. Baltimore, Md.: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
Matsusaka, John G. 2005. The Eclipse of Legislatures: Direct Democracy in the 21st Century. Public Choice 124 (1–2):157–177.Google Scholar
Mendelsohn, Matthew, and Cutler, Fred. 2000. The Effect of Referendums on Democratic Citizens: Information, Politicization, Efficacy and Tolerance. British Journal of Political Science 30 (4):669–698.Google Scholar
Milewicz, Karolina, and Goodin, Robert E.. 2012. Deliberative Capacity Building through International Organizations. American Political Science Association 2012 Annual Meeting Paper, available at http://ssrn.com/abstract=2106604.Google Scholar
Milic, Thomas. 2009. Von der Parteilichkeit der Argumente. Presented at the Jahreskongress der Schweizerischen Vereinigung für Politische Wissenschaft, St. Gallen, in 2009.Google Scholar
Mondak, Jeffery J. 2000. Reconsidering the Measurement of Political Knowledge. Political Analysis 8 (1):57–82.Google Scholar
Nai, Alessandro. 2013. What Really Matters Is Which Camp Goes Dirty: Differential Effects of Negative Campaigning on Turnout During Swiss Federal Ballots. European Journal of Political Research 52 (1):44–70.Google Scholar
Nai, Alessandro. 2015. The Maze and the Mirror: Voting Correctly in Direct Democracy. Social Science Quarterly 96 (2):465–486.Google Scholar
Neblo, M. A., Siegel, D. A., and Minozzi, W.. 2012. A Theory of Deliberation as Interactive Reasoning. Presented at the 2012 Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association.Google Scholar
Neijens, Peter, and de Vreese, Claes. 2009. Helping Citizens Decide in Referendums: The Moderating Effect of Political Sophistication on the Use of the Information and Choice Questionnaire as a Decision Aid. Public Opinion Quarterly 73 (3):521–536.Google Scholar
Pedrini, Seraina. 2014. Deliberative Capacity in the Political and Civic Sphere. Swiss Political Science Review 20 (2):263–286.Google Scholar
Price, Vincent, and Zaller, John. 1993. Who Gets the News? Alternative Measures of News Reception and Their Implications for Research. Public Opinion Quarterly 57 (2):133–164.Google Scholar
Prior, Markus. 2007. Post-Broadcast Democracy: How Media Choice Increases Inequality in Political Involvement and Polarizes Elections. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Sanders, Lynn M. 1997. Against Deliberation. Political Theory 25 (3):347–376.Google Scholar
Schiller, Theo. 2011. Local Direct Democracy in Europe: A Comparative Overview. Pp. 9–29 in Local Direct Democracy in Europe, edited by Theo Schiller. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.Google Scholar
Sciarini, Pascal, Nai, Alessandro, and Tresch, Anke. 2014. Analyse de la votation fédérale du 9 février 2014. Bern/Genève: gfs. bern et Université de Genève.Google Scholar
Shaker, Lee. 2012. Local Political Knowledge and Assessments of Citizen Competence. Public Opinion Quarterly 76:525–537.Google Scholar
Smith, Daniel A., and Tolbert, Caroline. 2004. Educated by Initiative: The Effects of Direct Democracy On Citizens and Political Organizations in the American States. Michigan: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
Sniderman, Paul M., Tetlock, Phillip E., and Brody, Richard A.. 1991. Reasoning and Choice: Explorations in Political Psychology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Somin, Ilya. 2004. When Ignorance Isn’t Bliss. Policy Analysis 525:1–28.Google Scholar
Steiner, J. 2004. Deliberative Politics in Action: Analyzing Parliamentary Discourse. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Steiner, Jürg. 2012. The Foundations of Deliberative Democracy: Empirical Research and Normative Implications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Steiner, Jürg, Bächtiger, André, Spörndli, Markus, and Steenbergen, Marco R.. 2004. Deliberative Politics in Action: Analyzing Parliamentary Discourse. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Taber, Charles S., and Lodge, Milton. 2006. Motivated Skepticism in the Evaluation of Political Beliefs. American Journal of Political Science 26 (3):755–769.Google Scholar
Tetlock, Philip E. 1983. Accountability and Complexity of Thought. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 45 (1):74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thompson, Dennis F. 2008. Deliberative Democratic Theory and Empirical Political Science. Annual Review of Political Science 11:497–520.Google Scholar
Young, Iris M. 2000. Inclusion and Democracy, Vol. 18. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Zajonc, Robert B. 1980. Feeling and Thinking: Preferences Need No Inferences. American Psychologist 35 (2):151–157.Google Scholar
Zaller, John. 1992. The Nature and Origins of Mass Opinion. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Supplementary material: Link

Colombo Dataset

Dataset

https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/MR8BVX
Link
Supplementary material: File

Colombo supplementary material

Colombo supplementary material 1

Download Colombo supplementary material(File)
File 25.1 KB
Supplementary material: File

Colombo supplementary material

Appendix

Download Colombo supplementary material(File)
File 42.6 KB