Suchergebnisse

Digit-based election forensics (DBEF) typically relies on null hypothesis significance testing, with undesirable effects on substantive conclusions. This article proposes an alternative free of this problem. It rests on decomposing the observed numeral distribution into the "no fraud" and "fraud" latent classes, by finding the smallest fraction of numerals that needs to be either removed or reallocated to achieve a perfect fit of the "no fraud" model. The size of this fraction can be interpreted as a measure of fraudulence. Both alternatives are special cases of measures of model fit—theπ∗ mixture index of fit and the Δ dissimilarity index, respectively. Furthermore, independently of the latent class framework, the distributional assumptions of DBEF can be relaxed in some contexts. Independently or jointly, the latent class framework and the relaxed distributional assumptions allow us to dissect the observed distributions using models more flexible than those of existing DBEF. Reanalysis of Beber and Scacco's (2012) data shows that the approach can lead to new substantive conclusions.

This paper compares the bank regulatory regimes in the enlarged European Union in order to test the thesis claiming that international banking standards need to be adapted to emerging market circumstances. On the basis of World Bank surveys, we compile structural indices for the 10 post-communist EU members (emerging markets) as well as 17 advanced EU economies and compare them using Bayesian statistical procedures. Our findings show that there were systematic and significant differences, two-thirds of which can be explained by 8 of the 52 structural characteristics. The new member states regulatory regimes are more rule-based and leave less discretion for authorities, which is consistent with the thesis that the emerging market regulatory regimes - including those within the EU - needed to compensate for limited regulatory resources and higher political and economic volatility. Hence, the new generation of international banking standards should recognize these limitations.

The recent increase of democratic declines around the world – "the third wave of autocratization" – has sparked a new generation of studies on the topic. Scholars tend to agree that the main threat to contemporary democracy arises from democratically elected rulers who gradually erode democratic norms. Is it possible to identify future autocratizers before they win power in elections? Linz (1978) and Levitsky and Ziblatt (2018) suggest that a lacking commitment to democratic norms reveals would-be autocratizers before they reach office. This article argues that the concept of anti-pluralism rather than populism or extreme ideology captures this. We use a new expert-coded data set on virtually all relevant political parties worldwide from 1970 to 2019 (V-Party) to create a new Anti-Pluralism Index (API) to provide the first systematic empirical test of this argument. We find substantial evidence validating that the API and Linz's litmus-test indicators signal leaders and parties that will derail democracy if and when they come into power.

Questions such as how democratic a country is, how free are its media, or how independent is its judiciary are highly important to researchers and decision makers. We describe a research infrastructure that produces the world's largest dataset on democracy, governance, human rights, and related topics. The dataset is far more resolved and accurate than previous efforts, currently covers 202 political units from 1789 until the present, and is regularly updated each spring. The infrastructure involves an online survey of over 3,000 experts from 180 countries. Survey design and advanced statistical techniques are crucial for assuring data validity. The infrastructure also provides reports and analyses based on the data and easy-to-use tools for exploring and graphing the data.

This paper introduces a spatial model of civil conflict management rhetoric to explore how the emerging norm of responsibility to protect shapes major power rhetorical responses to civil war. Using framing theory, we argue that responsibility to protect functions like a prescriptive norm, such that representing a conflict as one of (1) human rights violations (problem definition), implies rhetorical support for (2) coercive outside intervention (solution identification). These dimensions reflect the problem-solution form of a prescriptive norm. Using dictionary scaling with a dynamic model, we analyze the positions of UN Security Council members in debates over the Syrian Civil War separately for each dimension. We find that the permanent members who emphasized human rights violations also used intervention rhetoric (UK, France, and the US), and those who did not used non-intervention rhetoric (Russia and China). We conclude that, while not a fully consolidated norm, responsibility to protect appears to have structured major power rhetorical responses to the Syrian Civil War.

ABSTRACTMuch ink has been spilled to describe the emergence and likely influence of the Tea Party on the American political landscape. Pundits and journalists declared that the emergence of the Tea Party movement pushed the Republican Party to a more extreme ideological position, which is generally anti-Washington. To test this hypothesis, we analyzed the ideological positions taken by candidates in the 2008 and 2012 pre-Iowa caucus Republican presidential-primary debates. To establish the positions, we used the debate transcripts and a text-analytic technique that placed the candidates on a single dimension. Findings show that, overall, the 2012 candidates moved closer to an anti-Washington ideology—associated with the Tea Party movement—and away from the more traditional social conservative Republican ideology, which was more salient in the 2008 debates. Both Mitt Romney and Ron Paul, the two candidates who ran in both elections, shifted significantly in the ideological direction associated with the Tea Party.

AbstractThis paper introduces a new approach to the quantitative study of democratization. Building on the comparative case-study and large-N literature, it outlines an episode approach that identifies the discrete beginning of a period of political liberalization, traces its progression, and classifies episodes as successful versus different types of failing outcomes, thus avoiding potentially fallacious assumptions of unit homogeneity. We provide a description and analysis of all 383 liberalization episodes from 1900 to 2019, offering new insights on democratic "waves". We also demonstrate the value of this approach by showing that while several established covariates are valuable for predicting the ultimate outcomes, none explain the onset of a period of liberalization.

This paper introduces a new approach to the quantitative study of democratization. Building on the comparative case-study and large-N literature, it outlines an episode approach that identifies the discrete beginning of a period of political liberalization, traces its progression, and classifies episodes as successful versus different types of failing outcomes, thus avoiding potentially fallacious assumptions of unit homogeneity. We provide a description and analysis of all 383 liberalization episodes from 1900 to 2019, offering new insights on democratic "waves". We also demonstrate the value of this approach by showing that while several established covariates are valuable for predicting the ultimate outcomes, none explain the onset of a period of liberalization.