Suchergebnisse

The paper seeks to reconcile insights from winner-loser gap research with mainstream understanding of election legitimacy. The paper acknowledges that winning and losing elections creates differential incentives for citizens to remain supportive of their political system, but it argues that losers nevertheless have enough reasons to remain supportive in absolute terms. Drawing on democratic theory, the paper develops a rationale for why citizens are willing to accept electoral defeat voluntarily, and suggest a new way to conceptualize citizen reactions to election outcomes. It presents findings from a sample of election studies in established democracies to show that winners typically become more supportive whereas losers at minimum retain their level of support from before the election. It concludes that elections, when reasonably well executed, as they most often are in established democracies, build system support rather than undermine it. Losers will remain supportive provided that certain conditions are fulfilled. The crucial conditions are procedurial and consequential. Elections in established democracies typically build system support among both winners and losers. [Copyright Elsevier Ltd.]

Each day democratic governments make a multitude of decisions that are unwelcome to many citizens. The long-term stability of democracies depends on the willingness of losing citizens to remain loyal to the state. We know from experience that established democracies have earned the basic loyalty of both winners and losers. However, our knowledge on the processes involved is less well developed. One reason for this neglect is that social scientists tend to dislike the coercive powers of the state. This research will focus on citizens' willingness to accept unfavourable decisions. The question is empirical; it is not assumed that citizens are morally obliged to comply with governments' decision. Adapted from the source document.

To what extent can the conduct of government officials help make unfavourable decisions acceptable to those that are affected by them? To provide an answer to this under-explored question, this paper presents findings from two scenario experiments that allow the conduct of individual officials to vary according to a pre-determined standard, while keeping an unfavourable decision constant in a setting that approaches the real world. There are three main findings. First, both actual conduct and perceived fairness of treatment affect decision acceptance. Second, actual conduct matters much less for decision acceptance than perceived fairness of treatment. Third, citizens' beliefs about the moral right to a favourable outcome condition the effect of actual conduct (but not of perceived treatment fairness). In particular, morally disappointed citizens are less likely to accept the decision irrespective of how they are treated.

As a consequence in internationalization and general trends in publishing, compilation theses, a form of publication relatively new to the political science field, are likely to become increasingly common. Those specializing in social sciences disciplines such as psychology and economics have had more experience in dealing with this type of publication. Based on their experiences, it is possible to unite on certain guidelines when evaluating publication quality. A compilation thesis should typically include from three to five scholarly contributions. At least one contribution should be self-authored. It should be clear what portion of the writing has been contributed by the doctoral candidate. Contributions should deal with a common overall theme. The beginning summary of the thesis should be carefully evaluated for its effectiveness in pointing out gaps in earlier research on the topic under discussion and for the pulling together of contributions. Esaiasson discusses how some years ago teaching staff at the Goteborg Institute developed a set of evaluation guidelines but notes that the institute hasn't produced compilation theses in recent years, so the guidelines havent yet been tested in actual practice. Further discussion is needed concerning the criteria for evaluating this emerging type of publication. Adapted from the source document.

The Democracy Commission's case for participatory democracy is criticized. Participatory democracy undermines the political equality of the citizens, & requires a prevalent interest in public affairs that does not exist today. A compulsive & professional use of opinion polls on current political issues would be a better way to strengthen public political influence between elections. Adapted from the source document.

A framework for descriptive analysis of election campaigns is suggested, emphasizing the parties' use of direct (personal) and indirect (media) channels for voter communication. The direct campaign channels had their heyday during the 1920s and 1930s. Since the 1940s radio and television have dominated the scene. However, the parties maintained control over opinion formation until the breakthrough of an assertive and independent political journalism at the end of the 1960s.