Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
×
Home

Winners and losers reconsidered: party support, character valence, and satisfaction with democracy

  • Debra Leiter (a1), April K. Clark (a2) and Michael Clark (a2)

Abstract

Studies of citizens’ satisfaction with democracy have established a connection between satisfaction and how well those citizens’ preferred parties perform in elections. Yet, the question remains whether ‘winners’ and ‘losers’ respond to the same system- and party-level factors when evaluating their political satisfaction. We build on extant literature to consider citizen satisfaction with democracy from the perspective of character valence. Using the Mannheim Eurobarometer trend file and content analysis-based data on parties’ character valence, we find that both winners’ and losers’ satisfaction with the political system is affected by parties’ character valence, but in differing (and somewhat surprising) ways. We find that winners respond to improvements in the character valence of opposition parties, whereas losers demonstrate greater concern with the valence of governing parties.

  • View HTML
    • Send article to Kindle

      To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

      Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

      Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

      Winners and losers reconsidered: party support, character valence, and satisfaction with democracy
      Available formats
      ×

      Send article to Dropbox

      To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

      Winners and losers reconsidered: party support, character valence, and satisfaction with democracy
      Available formats
      ×

      Send article to Google Drive

      To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

      Winners and losers reconsidered: party support, character valence, and satisfaction with democracy
      Available formats
      ×

Copyright

Corresponding author

Footnotes

Hide All

An earlier version of this paper was prepared for presentation at the annual meeting of the European Consortium on Political Research, 3–6 September 2014, University of Glasgow, Scotland.

Footnotes

References

Hide All
Aarts, K. and Thomassen, J. (2008), ‘Satisfaction with democracy: do institutions matter?Electoral Studies 27(1): 518.
Abney, R., Adams, J., Clark, M., Easton, M., Ezrow, L., Kosmidis, S. and Neundorf, A. (2011), ‘When does valence matter? Heightened valence effects for governing parties during election campaigns’, Party Politics 19(1): 6182.
Adams, J. and Ezrow, L. (2009), ‘Who do European parties represent? How western European parties represent the policy preferences of opinion leaders’, Journal of Politics 71(1): 206223.
Adams, J., Clark, M., Ezrow, L. and Glasgow, G. (2006), ‘Are niche parties fundamentally different from mainstream parties? The causes and the electoral consequences of western European parties’ policy shifts, 1976–1998’, American Journal of Political Science 50(3): 513529.
Adams, J., Ezrow, L. and Leiter, D. (2012), ‘Partisan sorting and niche parties in Europe’, West European Politics 35(6): 12721294.
Adams, J., Merrill, S. III, Simas, E.N. and Stone, W.J. (2011), ‘When candidates value good character: a spatial model with applications to congressional elections’, The Journal of Politics 73(1): 1730.
Almond, G.A. and Verba, S. (1963), The Civic Culture: Political Attitudes and Democracy in Five Nations, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Anderson, C.J. (2000), ‘Economic voting and political context: a comparative perspective’, Electoral Studies 19: 151170.
Anderson, C.J. and Guillory, C.A. (1997), ‘Political institutions and satisfaction with democracy: a cross-national analysis of consensus and majoritarian systems’, The American Political Science Review 91(1): 6681.
Anderson, C.J. and Singer, M.M. (2008), ‘The sensitive left and the impervious right: multilevel models and the politics of inequality, ideology, and legitimacy in Europe’, Comparative Political Studies 41(4): 564599.
Anderson, C.J., Blais, A., Bowler, S., Donovan, T. and Listhaug, O. (2005), Losers’ Consent: Elections and Democratic Legitimacy, Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Armingeon, K., Weistanner, D., Engler, S., Potolidis, P., Gerber, M. and Leimgruber, P. (2011), Comparative Political Data Set 1960–2008, Bern: Institute of Political Science, University of Bern.
Belanger, E. and Meguid, B. (2008), ‘Issue salience, issue ownership and issue-based vote-choice’, Electoral Studies 27(3): 477491.
Berggren, H.M., Fugate, G.A., Pruehs, R.R. and Still, D.R. (2004), ‘Satisfied? Institutional determinants of citizen evaluations of democracy’, Politics and Policy 32(1): 7296.
Bernauer, J. and Vatter, A. (2012), ‘Can’t get no satisfaction with the Westminster model? Winners, losers and the effects of consensual and direct democratic institutions on satisfaction with democracy’, European Journal of Political Research 51(4): 435468.
Bowler, S. and Karp, J.A. (2004), ‘Politicians, scandals, and trust in Government’, Political Behavior 26(3): 271287.
Buchler, J. (2008), ‘The ‘V’ term: unpacking the dimensions of valence and their policy consequences’, Presented at the Annual Meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association, Chicago, IL.
Budge, I., Klingemann, H.-D., Volkens, A., Bara, J. and Tanenbaum, E. (2001), Mapping Policy Preferences: Estimates for Parties, Electors, and Governments, 1945–1998, Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Burden, B.C. (2004), ‘Candidate positioning in US congressional elections’, British Journal of Political Science 34(02): 211227.
Butler, D.M. and Powell, E.N. (2014), ‘Understanding the party brand: experimental evidence on the role of valence’, Journal of Politics 76(2): 492505.
Buttice, M. and Stone, W.J. (2012), ‘Candidates matter: policy and quality differences in congressional elections’, Journal of Politics 74(3): 870887.
Canache, D., Mondak, J.J. and Seligson, M.A. (2001), ‘Meaning and measurement in cross-national research on satisfaction with democracy’, Public Opinion Quarterly 65(4): 506528.
Claassen, R.L. and Ensley, M.J. (2016), ‘Motivated reasoning and yard-sign-stealing partisans: mine is a likable rogue, yours is a degenerate criminal’, Political Behavior 38: 317335.
Clark, M. (2009), ‘Valence and electoral outcomes in western Europe, 1976–1998’, Electoral Studies 28(1): 111122.
Clark, M. and Leiter, D. (2014), ‘Does the ideological dispersion of parties mediate the electoral impact of valence? A cross-national study of party support in nine western European democracies’, Comparative Political Studies 47(2): 171202.
Clarke, H.D., Sanders, D., Stewart, M.C., and Whiteley, P.F. (2009), Performance Politics and the British Voter, Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Curini, L. (2017), Corruption, Ideology, and Populism: The Rise of Valence Political Campaigning, New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Curini, L. and Martelli, P. (2015), ‘A case of valence competition on elections: parties’ emphasis on corruption in electoral manifestos’, Party Politics 21(5): 686698.
Curini, L., Jou, W. and Memoli, V. (2012), ‘Satisfaction with democracy and the winner/loser debate: the role of policy preferences and past experience’, British Journal of Political Science 42(2): 241261.
Curini, L., Jou, W. and Memoli, V. (2015), Why Policy Representation Matters: The Consequences of Ideological Proximity Between Citizens and Their Government, London, UK: Routledge.
Dahlberg, S. and Linde, J. (2016), ‘Losing happily? The mitigating effect of democracy and quality of government on the winner-loser gap in political support’, International Journal of Public Administration 39(9): 652664.
Dalton, R.J., Farrell, D.M., and McAllister, I. (2011), Political Parties and Democratic Linkage: How Parties Organize Democracy, New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Döring, H. and Manow, P. (2019), Parliaments and governments database (ParlGov): Information on parties, elections and cabinets in modern democracies. Stable version. Accessed at =https://protect-eu.mimecast.com/s/-VtNCywywF7L46vTZp3m3?domainparlgov.org" http://www.parlgov.org/
Ezrow, L. and Xezonakis, G. (2011), ‘Citizen satisfaction with democracy and parties’ policy offerings’, Comparative Political Studies 44(9): 11521178.
Ezrow, L., De Vries, C., Steenbergen, M. and Edwards, E. (2011), ‘Mean voter representation and partisan constituency representation: do parties respond to the mean voter position or to their supporters?’, Party Politics 17(3): 275301.
Fiorina, M.P. (1974), Representatives, Roll-Calls, and Constituencies, Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.
Green, J. (2007), ‘When voters and parties agree: valence issues and party competition’, Political Studies 55(3): 629655.
Green, J. and Hobolt, S.B. (2008), ‘Owning the issue agenda: party strategies and vote choices in British elections’, Electoral Studies 27(3): 460476.
Green, J. and Jennings, W. (2012), ‘The dynamics of issue competence and vote for parties in out of power: an analysis of valence in Britain, 1979–1997’, European Journal of Political Research 51: 469503.
Green, J. and Jennings, W. (2017), The Politics of Competence: Parties, Public Opinion, and Voters, Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Henderson, A. (2008), ‘Satisfaction with democracy: the impact of winning and losing in Westminster systems’, Journal of Elections, Public Opinion, and Parties 18(1): 326.
Hobolt, S.B. (2012), ‘Citizen satisfaction with democracy in the European Union’, Journal of Common Market Studies 50: 88105.
Howell, P. and Justwan, F. (2013), ‘Nail-biters and no-contests: the effect of electoral margins on satisfaction with democracy in winners and losers’, Electoral Studies 32: 334343.
Inglehart, R.F. (1990), Culture Shift: In Advanced Industrial Society, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Karp, J.A. and Bowler, S. (2001), ‘Coalition politics and satisfaction with democracy: explaining New Zealand’s reaction to proportional representation’, European Journal of Political Research 40(1): 5779.
Karp, J.A., Banducci, S.A. and Bowler, S. (2003), ‘To know it is to love it? Satisfaction with democracy in the European Union’, Comparative Political Studies 36(3): 271292.
Kunda, Z. (1990), ‘The case for motivated reasoning’, Psychological Bulletin 108(3): 480498.
Leeper, T.J. and Slothuus, R. (2014), ‘Political parties, motivated reasoning, and public opinion formation’, Political Psychology 35(1): 129156.
Leiter, D. and Clark, M. (2015), ‘Valence and satisfaction with democracy: a cross-national analysis of nine western European democracies’, European Journal of Political Research 54(3): 543562.
Lewis-Beck, M.S. (1990), ‘Economics and elections: the major western democracies’, Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
Lijphart, A. (1984), Democracies: Patterns of Majoritarian and Consensus Government in Twenty-One Countries, New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Lijphart, A. (1999), Patterns of Democracy: Government Forms and Performance in Thirty-Six Countries, New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Linde, J. and Ekman, J. (2003), ‘Satisfaction with democracy: a note on a frequently used indicator in comparative politics’, European Journal of Political Research 42(3): 391408.
Matsubayashi, T. (2007), ‘Population size, local autonomy, and support for the political system’, Social Science Quarterly 88(3): 830849.
McCurley, C. and Mondak, J.J. (1995), ‘Inspected by #1184063113: the influence of incumbents’ competence and integrity in U.S. house elections’, American Journal of Political Science 39(4): 864885.
Meguid, B.M. (2008), Party Competition between Unequals: Strategies and Electoral Fortunes in Western Europe, Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Molden, D.C. and Tory Higgins, E. (2005), ‘Motivated thinking’, in K.Holyoak, J. and R.Morrison, G. (eds), The Cambridge Handbook of Thinking and Reasoning, New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. 295320.
Mondak, J.J. (1995), ‘Competence, integrity, and the electoral success of congressional incumbents’, The Journal of Politics 57(04): 10431069.
Montgomery, J., Nyhan, B. and Torres, M. (2018), ‘How conditioning on posttreatment variables can ruin your experiment’, American Journal of Political Science 62(3): 760775.
Norris, P. (1999), ‘Institutional explanations of political support’, in PNorris, . (ed.), Critical Citizens: Global Support for Democratic Government, Oxford: Oxford University Press. pp. 217232.
Nyhan, B. and Reifler, J. (2010), ‘When corrections fail: the persistence of political misperceptions’, Political Behavior 32: 303330.
Palmer, H.D. and Whitten, G. (2000), ‘Government competence, economic performance and endogenous election dates’, Electoral Studies 19: 413426.
Pardos-Prado, S. (2012), ‘Valence beyond consensus: party competence and policy dispersion from a comparative perspective’, Electoral Studies 31(2): 342352.
Petrocik, J.R. (1996), ‘Issue ownership in presidential elections, with a 1980 case study’, American Journal of Political Science 40(3): 825850.
Pharr, S.J., Putnam, R.D. and Dalton, R.J. (2000), ‘A quarter-century of declining confidence’, Journal of Democracy 11(2): 525.
Poguntke, T. and Scarrow, S.E. (1996), ‘The politics of anti-party sentiment: introduction’, European Journal of Political Research 29(3): 257262.
Powell, G.B. (1982), Contemporary Democracies: Participation, Stability, and Violence, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Redlawsk, D. P. (2002), ‘Hot cognition or cool consideration? testing the effects of motivated reasoning on political decision-making’, The Journal of Politics 64(4): 10211044.
Ruiz-Rufino, R. (2013), ‘Satisfaction with democracy in multi-ethnic countries: the effect of representative political institutions on ethnic minorities’, Political Studies 61: 101118.
Singh, S.P. (2014), ‘Not all election winners are equal: satisfaction with democracy and the nature of the vote’, European Journal of Political Research 53: 308327.
Singh, S.P. and Thornton, J.R. (2016), ‘Strange bedfellows: coalition makeup and perceptions of democratic performance among electoral winners’, Electoral Studies 42: 114125.
Singh, S.P., Karakoc, E. and Blais, A. (2012), ‘Differentiating winners: how elections affect satisfaction with democracy’, Electoral Studies 31: 201211.
Stokes, D. (1992), ‘Valence politics’, in D., Kavanagh (ed.), Electoral Politics, Oxford: Oxford University Press. pp 141164.
Stokes, D.E. (1963), ‘Spatial models of party competition’, The American Political Science Review 57(2): 368377.
Stone, W.J. and Simas, E.N. (2010), ‘Candidate valence and ideological positions in U.S. house elections’, American Journal of Political Science 54(2): 371388.
Taber, C.S. and Lodge, M. (2006): ‘Motivated skepticism in the evaluation of political beliefs’, American Journal of Political Science 50(3): 755769.
Vonnahme, B. (2014), ‘Surviving scandal: an exploration of the immediate and lasting effects of scandal on candidate evaluation’, Social Science Quarterly 95(5): 13081321.
Webb, P., Farrell, D.M. and Holliday, I. (eds) (2002), Political Parties in Advanced Industrial Democracies, Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Wells, J.M. and Krieckhaus, J. (2006), ‘Does national context influence democratic satisfaction? A multi-level analysis’, Political Research Quarterly 59(4): 569578.
Zakharova, M. and Warwick, P.V. (2014), ‘The sources of valence judgments: the role of policy distance and the structure of the left-right spectrum’, Comparative Political Studies 47(14), doi: 10.1177/0010414013516928
Recommend this journal

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

European Political Science Review
  • ISSN: 1755-7739
  • EISSN: 1755-7747
  • URL: /core/journals/european-political-science-review
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×

Keywords

Type Description Title
WORD
upplementary Materials

Leiter et al. supplementary material
Leiter et al. supplementary material 1

 Word (3.7 MB)
3.7 MB

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