Skip to main content Accessibility help

Bridging Spatial and Saliency Theory: Party Size and Issue Selection in Campaigns

  • Chitralekha Basu (a1)


I propose a unified explanation for parties' joint policy and emphasis decisions which bridges saliency theory and spatial analyses of party campaigns. Party platforms are anchored by the policy preferences of activists, core supporters and target voters, leading parties to disproportionately emphasize issues where their policies are popular with all key constituencies. However, which voters a party targets relates to its historical electoral performance (“party size”). Traditionally successful (“major”) parties emphasize issues where the policies preferred by activists and core supporters are generally popular, but smaller (“minor”) parties emphasize issues where their preferred policies may be unpopular but are distinctive. Using recent European data and various empirical strategies, I show that this account has significant explanatory power beyond existing party typologies and theories of issue selection.


Corresponding author

*Corresponding author. Email:


Hide All
Abou-Chadi, T and Orlowski, M (2016) Moderate as necessary: the role of electoral competitiveness and party size in explaining parties' policy shifts. Journal of Politics 78, 868881.
Abramson, PR, Aldrich, JH, Blais, A, Diamond, M, Diskin, A, Indridason, IH, Lee, DJ and Levine, R (2010) Comparing strategic voting under FPTP and PR. Comparative Political Studies 43, 6190.
Adams, J (2012) Causes and electoral consequences of party policy shifts in multiparty elections: theoretical results and empirical evidence. Annual Review of Political Science 15, 401–19.
Aldrich, J (1983) A downsian spatial model with party activists. American Political Science Review 77, 974–90.
Ansolabehere, S, Snyder, JM, Strauss, AB and Ting, MM (2005) Voting weights and formateur advantages in the formation of coalition governments. American Journal of Political Science 49, 550563.
Armingeon, K, Knöpfel, L, Weisstanner, D and Engler, S (2014) Comparative Political Data Set I 1960–2012. Bern: Institute of Political Science, University of Berne.
Baetschmann, G, Staub, KE and Winkelmann, R (2015) Consistent estimation of the fixed effects ordered logit model. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series A (Statistics in Society) 178, 685703.
Bakker, R, Edwards, E, Hooghe, L, Jolly, S, Marks, G, Polk, J, Rovny, J, Steenbergen, M and Vachudova, M (2015) 2014 Chapel Hill Expert Survey, Version 2015.1. Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill. Available on
Bawn, K, Cohen, M, Karol, D and Masket, S (2012) A theory of political parties: groups, policy demands and nominations in American politics. Perspectives on Politics 10, 571597.
Blais, A, Erisen, C and Rheault, L (2014) Strategic voting and coordination problems in proportional systems: an experimental study. Political Research Quarterly 67, 386397.
Budge, I and Farlie, D (1983) Party competition—selective emphasis or direct confrontation? an alternative view with data. In Western European Party Systems. Continuity and Change, Chapter 10. London: SAGE Publications, pp. 267305.
Corner, A, Venables, D, Spence, A, Poortinga, W, Demski, C and Pidgeon, N (2011) Nuclear power, climate change and energy security: exploring British public attitudes. Energy Policy 39, 48234833.
Cox, GW (1990) Centripetal and centrifugal incentives in electoral systems. American Journal of Political Science 34, 903–35.
Cutts, D and Russell, A (2015) From coalition to catastrophe: the electoral meltdown of the liberal democrats. Parliamentary Affairs 68, 7087.
Dahlberg, S and Martinsson, J (2015) Changing issue ownership through policy communication. West European Politics 38, 817838.
de Sio, L and Weber, T (2014) Issue yield: a model of party strategy in multidimensional space. American Political Science Review 108, 870885.
Döring, H. and Manow, P (2018) Parliaments and governments database (parlgov): Information on parties, elections and cabinets in modern democracies. Available at Development version.
Egan, PJ (2013) Partisan Priorities: How Issue Ownership Drives and Distorts American Politics. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Giger, N and Schumacher, G (2015) Integrated Party Organization Dataset (IPOD)., Harvard Dataverse. Version 1.
Green-Pedersen, C and Mortensen, PB (2010) Who sets the agenda and who responds to it in the Danish parliament? A new model of issue competition and agenda-setting. European Journal of Political Research 49, 257–81.
Gschwend, T (2007) Ticket-splitting and strategic voting under mixed electoral rules: evidence from Germany. European Journal of Political Research 46, 123.
Hobolt, SB and de Vries, CE (2012) When dimensions collide: the electoral success of issue entrepreneurs. European Union Politics 13, 246268.
Karp, JA and Banducci, SA (2007) Party mobilization and political participation in new and old democracies. Party Politics 13, 217234.
Katz, RS and Mair, P (1996) Cadre, catch-all or cartel? A rejoinder. Party Politics 2, 525534.
Kedar, O (2005) When moderate voters prefer extreme parties: policy balancing in parliamentary elections. American Political Science Review 99, 185199.
Kitschelt, H (1994) The Transformation of European Social Democracy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kriesi, H, Grande, E, Lachat, R, Dolezal, M, Bornschier, S and Frey, T (2006) Globalization and the transformation of the national political space: six European countries compared. European Journal of Political Research 45, 921956.
Mair, P, Müller, WC and Plasser, F (eds.) (2004) Political Parties and Electoral Change: Party Responses to Electoral Markets. London: SAGE Press.
Meguid, B (2005) Competition between unequals: the role of mainstream party strategy in niche party success. American Political Science Review 99, 347359.
Meguid, BM (2008) Party Competition between Unequals: Strategies and Electoral Fortunes in Western Europe. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Meyer, TM and Wagner, M (2016) Issue engagement in election campaigns: the impact of electoral incentives and organizational constraints. Political Science Research and Methods 4, 555571.
Miller, G and Schofield, N (2003) Activists and partisan realignment in the United States. American Political Science Review 97, 245260.
Petrocik, JR (1996) Issue ownership in presidential elections with a 1980 case study. American Journal of Political Science 40, 825850.
Pons, V (2018) Will a five-minute discussion change your mind? A countrywide experiment on voter choice in France. American Economic Review 108, 1322–63.
Popa, SA and Schmitt, H (2015). EES 2014 Voter Study. Mannheim: MZES, University of Mannheim.
Rabinowitz, G and Macdonald, SE (1989) A directional theory of issue voting. American Political Science Review 83, 93121.
Riedl, M and Geishecker, I (2014) Keep it simple: estimation strategies for ordered response models with fixed effects. Journal of Applied Statistics 41, 23582374.
Riker, WH (1996) The Strategy of Rhetoric: Campaigning for the American Constitution. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Rovny, J (2012) Who emphasizes and who blurs? Party strategies in multidimensional competition. European Union Politics 13, 269292.
Rovny, J (2013) Where do radical right parties stand? Position blurring in multidimensional competition. European Political Science Review 5, 126.
Russell, A and Fieldhouse, E (2005) Neither Left nor Right? The Liberal Democrats and the Electorate. Manchester: Manchester University Press.
Sagarzazu, I and Klüver, H (2017) Coalition governments and party competition: political communication strategies of coalition parties. Political Science Research and Methods 5, 333349.
Scarrow, SE (2015) Beyond Party Members: Changing Approaches to Partisan Mobilization. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Schofield, N (2004) Equilibrium in the spatial “valence” model of politics. Journal of Theoretical Politics 16, 447481.
Schumacher, G and Giger, N (2017) Who leads the party? On membership size, selectorates and party oligarchy. Political Studies 65, 162181.
Schumacher, G, de Vries, CE and Vis, B (2013) Why do parties change position? Party organization and environmental incentives. Journal of Politics 75, 464477.
Schumacher, G, Van de Wardt, M, Vis, B and Klitgaard, MB (2015) How aspiration to office conditions the impact of government participation on party platform change. American Journal of Political Science 59, 10401054.
Spoon, J-J (2009) Holding their own: explaining the persistence of green parties in France and the UK. Party Politics 15, 615634.
Spoon, J-J and Klüver, H (2015) Voter polarisation and party responsiveness: Why parties emphasize divided issues, but remain silent on unified issues. European Journal of Political Research 54, 343362.
van de Wardt, M (2014) Putting the damper on: do parties de-emphasize issues in response to internal divisions among their supporters? Party Politics 20, 330340.
van de Wardt, M, Vries, CED and Hobolt, SB (2014) Exploiting the cracks: wedge issues in multiparty competition. Journal of Politics 76, 986999.
Volkens, A, Lehmann, P, Matthieß, T, Merz, N, Regel, S and Weßels, B (2017) The manifesto data collection. Manifesto Project (MRG/CMP/MARPOR). Version 2017a.
Wagner, M (2012) When do parties emphasise extreme positions? How strategic incentives for policy differentiation influence issue importance. European Journal of Political Research 51, 6488.
Walgrave, S, Lefevere, J and Nuytemans, M (2009) Issue ownership stability and change: how political parties claim and maintain issues through media appearances. Political Communication 26, 152172.


Related content

Powered by UNSILO
Type Description Title
Supplementary materials

Basu Dataset

Supplementary materials

Basu supplementary material
Online Appendix

 PDF (358 KB)
358 KB

Bridging Spatial and Saliency Theory: Party Size and Issue Selection in Campaigns

  • Chitralekha Basu (a1)


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.