Introduces political psychology as a field that began in the early 20th century in the United States when Charles Merriam from the University of Chicago was researching how psychological factors are affecting political choices. In Europe political psychology has mainly been concerned with the reverse questioning: how politics are affecting psychology. Since the 1950's political psychology has been associated with analyzing and understanding international conflicts as is exemplified with Kelman and Fisher's research. L. Pitkaniemi
Herbert Tingsten (1896-1973) was one of the leading political science scholars in Sweden during the 20th century. In 1935-1946 he was a professor at Stockholm University. In 1946-1959 he was the editor-in-chief of the leading liberal newspaper in Sweden, the Dagens Nyheter. Tingsten's extensive scholarly production can be summed up in four groups. The first group describes the political institutions and rules, e.g. his doctoral thesis about referendum in the United States (1923). The second group contains analyses of political ideas. The third group combines institutional descriptions and analyses of ideas, primarily democratic and totalitarian ones. The fourth group, lastly, consists primarily of Political Behavior (1937). This book, a classic in the study of electoral statistics, gave Tingsten a lasting international acknowledgement. Adapted from the source document.
This dissertation examines key characteristics and factors shaping the leadership style of Swedish Prime Ministers (PMs). Based on the research of the American presidency, an interactionist framework is developed which draws upon institutional theory and political psychological theory. The analysis is advanced by exploring multiple sources and is based on four cases of leadership styles: two single party Social Democratic PMs, Ingvar Carlsson and Göran Persson, as well as two center/right coalition PMs, Thorbjörn Fälldin and Carl Bildt. Leadership style is studied through a focused comparison of the PMs' performance of four functions. Thus, the four PMs are studied as staffers and organizers of the cabinet and the Government Offices, decision makers, communicators and crisis managers. The results indicate that the office of the PM is elastic, accommodating a wide-ranging variation of leadership styles. The Social Democratic PMs display the most uniform leadership styles, but, rather surprisingly, they also have the most dissimilar leadership styles among the four cases. The center/right PMs' approaches differ to a great extent from one another, displaying mixed forms of leadership styles. The analysis explains how the PMs' leadership styles are shaped based on the interaction between their distinct personal characteristics and surrounding institutions. Thus, the dissertation concludes that leadership theories developed in a presidential setting are largely applicable in a parliamentary setting and that political behavior is not dictated by institutions such as formal structures or norms. The results encourage a reassessment of how personality, as an explanatory factor, is applied in mainstream political science. Furthermore, the analysis highlights the need for reconsidering the presidentialisation thesis and the notion of dominant leadership as there are alternative pathways to prime ministerial influence which are disregarded in the debate.
Power is the key concept within political science. The majority of political scientists argue that power should be defined in behavioral terms as a relation of coercion between human agents. The traditional view confines power to human behavior & directly observable actions & reactions. Drawing on modern sociological, structuration theory, it is possible to generate a concept of structural power that goes beyond the behavioral perspective. Power is coercion, but the concept of power also refers to agents' structural capabilities. In a fundamental sense the concept of structural power directs attention to the unequal resource agents derive from their structural positions within the societal system. Moreover, structural power is intimately linked to other key notions, such as anticipated reactions & enduring relations of control. Finally, the structuralist perspective on power is highly illuminating of permanent barriers to full democratization in modern society. Unequal resources & social inequality represent major obstacles to the realization of the principles of political equality. 3 Figures, 1 Skema, 31 References. Adapted from the source document.
How is a hybrid state maintained? Today, several countries undergoing democratic reforms are also backsliding towards greater authoritarianism. This article draws on election data from Macedonia and Albania to show how a country can display elements of democratic improvement and democratic deterioration within the same policy field. The Albanian case shows how the political parties, with an anchoring in legislation, work to make the electoral administration politically dependent. This enables the political parties to exert control over central aspects of the distribution of power. By contrast, the case of Macedonia shows how undemocratic behaviors can become institutionalized and gradually accepted, even as other features of the electoral process undergo improvement. Common to both countries are patterns of patronage that serve to maintain a unique organization of power: the democratic façade is improved, but the undemocratic behavior remains.
It is argued that political-administrative organizations are becoming increasingly complex with more horizontal governance required. In Swedish municipal administration, there is a group of administrators assigned the task of monitoring and promoting strategic topics that should be integrated horizontally within the organization. Examples of strategic topics are sustainability, safety/security, diversity, children/youth, public health, human rights, and gender equality. In the thesis, these administrators are called cross-sector strategists. The purpose of this dissertation is to explore how cross-sector strategists become a part of the political-administrative organization when representing, enacting, and reflecting on values in the undertaking of their formal posts. They are situated between the tradition of vertical governance, with formal procedures and hierarchy as its foundation, and the tradition of horizontal governance, with informal networks and deliberation as its foundation. Previous research has shown that this is likely to give rise to value conflicts, and the question is if cross-sector strategists experience value conflicts, and if so, how they cope with them. The cross-sector strategists are studied in this thesis from the perspective of situated agency – focusing on both the contextual expectations of the cross-sector strategists and on their internal reflections to solve value conflicts – in order to explore their process of becoming a part of the local government administration. A mixed-methods design is applied, containing analysis of job advertisements for cross-sector strategists, public managers, and social workers; in-depth interviews with cross-sector strategists; and a survey of professional networks for cross-sector strategists. The results show that cross-sector strategists are subjects to ambivalent and often-contradictory contextual expectations. Cross-sector strategists use the ambivalence of their work for their strategic purposes, and such ambivalence allows them to reframe their topics, their methods, their arguments, and their identity according to current situation in order to increase the impact of their assigned topics and diminish the inner conflict of wanting to be both a responsive bureaucrat and an active lobbyist. Combining these two dedications requires them to be highly reflexive and flexible actors. The outcome of cross-sector strategists' coping with value conflicts can be interpreted in two ways: 1) as if the cross-sector strategists are a formal tool to safeguard crucial democratic and ethical values due to the cross-sector strategists' method of sneaking the strategic policy areas into the organization. Or 2) as a to democracy risky administrative behavior in the long-term due to the disguising of value conflicts and diminished possibilities to process these value conflicts
