Skip to main content
×
×
Home

Ideals and Actions: Do Citizens’ Patterns of Political Participation Correspond to their Conceptions of Democracy?

  • Åsa Bengtsson and Henrik Christensen
Abstract

The interest in procedures for political decision-making has grown tremendously during recent decades. Given the intense scholarly debate and the implementation of greater opportunities for citizen participation in many democracies, there has been surprisingly little interest in citizens’ conceptions of democracy understood as their preferences concerning the processes by which the political system works. Some recent attempts do, however, suggest that it is important to expand the study of public opinion from policy output to decision-making processes, and that there are coherent patterns in citizens’ expectations of the way in which political decisions come about. What is not clear, though, is whether citizens’ different conceptions of democracy have repercussions for how they engage in politics. Using the Finnish National Election Study of 2011 (Borg and Grönlund 2011), this article explores the relationship between citizens’ conceptions of democracy and patterns of political participation. Results demonstrate a distinct association between citizens’ ideals and the actions they take.

Copyright
Footnotes
Hide All
*

Åsa Bengtsson is Academy Research Fellow in the Department of Political Science at Åbo Akademi University and Professor in Political Science at Mid Sweden University. Contact email: asa.bengtsson@abo.fi.

Henrik Christensen is a Postdoctoral Researcher in the Department of Political Science at Åbo Akademi University. Contact email: henrik.christensen@abo.fi.

Footnotes
References
Hide All
Anderson, C. and Goodyear-Grant, E. (2010), ‘Why are Highly Informed Citizens Sceptical of Referenda?’, Electoral Studies, 29(2): 227238.
Barber, B. (1984), Strong Democracy. Participatory Politics for a New Age (Berkeley: University of California Press).
Bengtsson, Å. (2012), ‘Citizens’ Perceptions of Political Processes. A Critical Evaluation of Preference Consistency and Survey Items’, Revista Internacional de Sociología, 70(2): 4564.
Bengtsson, Å. and Mattila, M. (2009), ‘Direct Democracy and its Critics: Support for Direct Democracy and “Stealth Democracy” in Finland’, West European Politics, 32(5): 10131048.
Borg, S. and Grönlund, K. (2011), Finnish National Election Study 2011 (computer file), Finnish Social Science Data Archive (FSD) 2653, version 2.1 (22 January 2013), data collection by Taloustutkimus, Helsinki, produced by Election Study Consortium (Tampere: Finnish Social Science Data Archive).
Bowler, S., Donovan, T. and Karp, J.A. (2007), ‘Enraged or Engaged? Preferences for Direct Citizen Participation in Affluent Democracies’, Political Research Quarterly, 60(3): 351362.
Burns, N., Schlozman, K.L. and Verba, S. (2001), The Private Roots of Public Action – Gender, Equality, and Political Participation (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press).
Carman, C.J. (2007), ‘Assessing Preferences for Political Representation in the US’, Journal of Elections, Public Opinions and Parties, 17(1): 119.
Christensen, H.S. (2013), ‘Institutional Incentives for Participation in Elections and Between Elections’, in P. Esaiasson and H.M. Narud (eds), Between-Election Democracy (Colchester: ECPR Press): 103126.
Christensen, H.S. and Bengtsson, Å. (2011), ‘The Political Competence of Internet Participants: Evidence from Finland’, Information Communication and Society, 14(3): 121.
Citrin, J. (1974), ‘Comment: The Political Relevance of Trust in Government’, American Political Science Review, 68(3): 973988.
Cohen, A.R., Stotland, E. and Wolfe, D.M. (1955), ‘An Experimental Investigation of Need for Cognition’, Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 51(2): 291294.
Dahl, R. (1956), A Preface to Democratic Theory (Chicago: University of Chicago Press).
Dalton, R.J. (2004), Democratic Challenges, Democratic Choices: The Erosion of Political Support in Advanced Democracies (Oxford: Oxford University Press).
Dalton, R.J. (2006), Citizen Politics: Public Opinion and Political Parties in Advanced Industrial Democracies, 4th edn (Washington: CQ Press).
Dalton, R.J., Bürklin, W. and Drummond, A. (2001), ‘Public Opinion and Direct Democracy’, Journal of Democracy, 12(4): 141153.
Donovan, T. and Karp, J.A. (2006), ‘Popular Support for Direct Democracy’, Party Politics, 12(5): 671688.
Eckstein, H. (1975), ‘Case Studies and Theory in Political Science’, in F. Greenstein and N. Polsby (eds), Handbook of Political Science, vol. 7 (Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley): 79138.
Esaiasson, P. and Narud, H.M. (2013) (eds), Between-Election Democracy (Colchester: ECPR Press).
Esaiasson, P., Gilljam, M. and Persson, M. (2012), ‘Which Decision-Making Arrangements Generate the Strongest Legitimacy Beliefs? Evidence from a Randomised Field Experiment’, European Journal of Political Research, 51(6): 785808.
Esaiasson, P. , Gilljam, M., Lindholm, T. and Persson, M. (2013), ‘Deciding the Fair Way or Having it My Way? A New Look at Procedural Fairness Theory in the Domain of Policy Decisions’, paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association, Chicago, April.
Fiorina, M. (1981), Retrospective Voting in American National Elections (New Haven: Yale University Press).
Font, J. and Alarcón, P. (2011), ‘The Role of Personality in the Explanation of Preferences for Democratic Processes’, paper presented at the Annual Scientific Meeting of the International Society of Political Psychology, Istanbul.
Hibbing, J.R. and Theiss-Morse, E. (2001), ‘Process Preferences and American Politics: What the People Want Government to Be’, American Political Science Review, 95(1): 145153.
Hibbing, J.R. and Theiss-Morse, E. (2002), Stealth Democracy: Americans’ Beliefs About How Government Should Work (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).
Inglehart, R. (1997), Modernization and Postmodernization: Cultural, Economic, and Political Change in 43 Societies (Princeton: Princeton University Press).
Kaase, M. (1999), ‘Interpersonal Trust, Political Trust and Non-institutionalized Political Participation in Western Europe’, West European Politics, 22(3): 121.
Keane, J. (2009), Life and Death of Democracy (London: Simon & Schuster).
Leone, C., Wallace, H.M. and Modglin, K. (1999), ‘The Need for Closure and the Need for Structure: Interrelationships, Correlates, and Outcomes’, Journal of Psychology: Interdisciplinary and Applied, 133(5): 553562.
Mair, P. (2006), ‘Ruling the Void? The Hollowing of Western Democracy’, New Left Review, 42: 2551.
Majone, G. (2002), ‘The European Commission: The Limits of Centralization and the Perils of Parliamentarization’, Governance, 15(3): 375392.
Marien, S., Hooghe, M. and Quintelier, E. (2010), ‘Inequalities in Non-institutionalised Forms of Political Participation: A Multilevel Analysis of 25 Countries’, Political Studies, 58(2): 187213.
Micheletti, M. and McFarland, A.S. (2011), Creative Participation: Responsibility-taking in the Political World (London: Paradigm).
Michels, A. and de Graaf, L. (2010), ‘Examining Citizen Participation: Local Participatory Policy Making and Democracy’, Local Government Studies, 36(4): 477491.
Neblo, M.A., Esterling, K.M., Kennedy, R.P., Lazer, D.M.-J. and Sokhey, A.E. (2010), ‘Who Wants to Deliberate – And Why?’, American Political Science Review, 104(3): 566583.
Norris, P. (1999) (ed.), Critical Citizens: Global Support for Democratic Governance (Oxford: Oxford University Press).
Norris, P. (2011), Democratic Deficit: Critical Citizens Revisited (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).
Pateman, C. (1970), Participation and Democratic Theory (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).
Popkin, S.L. (1991), The Reasoning Voter: Communication and Persuasion in Presidential Campaigns (Chicago: University of Chicago Press).
Riker, W.H. (1982), Liberalism against Populism (San Francisco: W.H. Freeman).
Rosanvallon, P. (2011), Democratic Legitimacy: Impartiality, Reflexivity, Proximity (Princeton: Princeton University Press).
Sartori, G. (1987), The Theory of Democracy Revisited (Chatham, NJ: Chatham House).
Scarrow, S. (2001), ‘Direct Democracy and Institutional Change: A Comparative Investigation’, Comparative Political Studies, 34(6): 651665.
Scarrow, S. (2004), ‘Making Elections More Direct? Reducing the Role of Parties in Elections’, in B.E. Cain, R.J. Dalton and S. Scarrow (eds), Democracy Transformed? Expanding Political Opportunities in Advanced Industrial Democracies (Oxford: Oxford University Press): 4458.
Schumpeter, J.A. (1942), Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy (New York: Harper).
Setälä, M. (2009), ‘Introduction’, in T. Schiller and M. Setälä (eds), Referendums and Representative Democracy (London: Routledge): 114.
Tourangeau, R., Rips, L.J. and Rasinski, K. (2000), The Psychology of Survey Response (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).
Tyler, T. (2006), ‘Psychological Perspectives on Legitimacy and Legitimation’, Annual Review of Psychology, 57: 375400.
Wallace, W. and Smith, J. (1995), ‘Democracy or Technocracy? European Integration and the Problem of Popular Consent’, West European Politics, 18(3): 137157.
Wass, H. (2007), ‘The Effects of Age, Generation and Period on Turnout in Finland 1975–2003’, Electoral Studies, 26(3): 648659.
Verba, S., Schlozman, K.L. and Brady, H.E. (1995), Voice and Equality: Civic Volunteerism in American Politics (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press).
Webb, P. (2013), ‘Who is Willing to Participate? Dissatisfied Democrats, Stealth Democrats and Populists in the United Kingdom’, European Journal of Political Research, 52(6): 747772.
Zaller, J.R. and Feldman, S. (1992), ‘A Simple Theory of the Survey Response: Answering Questions versus Revealing Preferences’, American Journal of Political Science, 36(3): 579616.
Zittel, T. and Fuchs, D. (2007) (eds), Participatory Democracy and Political Participation – Can Participatory Engineering Bring Citizens Back in? (London: Routledge).
Recommend this journal

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

Government and Opposition
  • ISSN: 0017-257X
  • EISSN: 1477-7053
  • URL: /core/journals/government-and-opposition
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×

Metrics

Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 17
Total number of PDF views: 299 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 1067 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between September 2016 - 26th September 2018. This data will be updated every 24 hours.