Elite polarization — The boon and bane of democracy: Evidence from thirty democracies

IF 2.9 2区 社会学 Q1 POLITICAL SCIENCE
Armin Seimel
{"title":"Elite polarization — The boon and bane of democracy: Evidence from thirty democracies","authors":"Armin Seimel","doi":"10.1016/j.electstud.2024.102801","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Democracy is under threat, while polarization is rising. Empirical evidence to understand a possible link between the two is mixed, with scholars finding elite polarization increases turnout but decreases democratic satisfaction. However, these mixed results span various samples and methodologies, including elite surveys and manifestos to capture elite polarization data, but they rarely address how citizens perceive this polarization. In response, I present a new individual-level measure of perceived elite polarization, revealing the complexities of individual perceptions of elite polarization that extend beyond macro elite polarization and is applicable to any party system. The results from applying this new measure confirms that higher perceptions of elite polarization can engage citizens but reduce satisfaction by testing effects on democratic satisfaction and turnout across 34 democracies over 25 years, in addition to panel data in the United Kingdom. However, higher perceptions of elite polarization also decrease the likelihood of people being simultaneously satisfied with democracy and voting. These findings indicate that high perceived elite polarization can be detrimental to democracy and emphasizes the complexity in individual perceptions of elite polarization, underscoring the need for further study.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48188,"journal":{"name":"Electoral Studies","volume":"90 ","pages":"Article 102801"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0261379424000593/pdfft?md5=f9279e35d759631e362a1ad228ee5e48&pid=1-s2.0-S0261379424000593-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Electoral Studies","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0261379424000593","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Democracy is under threat, while polarization is rising. Empirical evidence to understand a possible link between the two is mixed, with scholars finding elite polarization increases turnout but decreases democratic satisfaction. However, these mixed results span various samples and methodologies, including elite surveys and manifestos to capture elite polarization data, but they rarely address how citizens perceive this polarization. In response, I present a new individual-level measure of perceived elite polarization, revealing the complexities of individual perceptions of elite polarization that extend beyond macro elite polarization and is applicable to any party system. The results from applying this new measure confirms that higher perceptions of elite polarization can engage citizens but reduce satisfaction by testing effects on democratic satisfaction and turnout across 34 democracies over 25 years, in addition to panel data in the United Kingdom. However, higher perceptions of elite polarization also decrease the likelihood of people being simultaneously satisfied with democracy and voting. These findings indicate that high perceived elite polarization can be detrimental to democracy and emphasizes the complexity in individual perceptions of elite polarization, underscoring the need for further study.

精英两极分化--民主的利弊:来自三十个民主国家的证据
民主受到威胁,两极分化却在加剧。学者们发现,精英两极分化会提高投票率,但会降低民主满意度。然而,这些喜忧参半的结果涉及不同的样本和方法,包括精英调查和获取精英两极分化数据的宣言,但很少涉及公民如何看待这种两极分化。为此,我提出了一种新的个人层面的精英极化感知测量方法,揭示了个人对精英极化感知的复杂性,它超越了宏观精英极化,适用于任何政党制度。应用这一新测量方法的结果证实,对精英两极分化的较高感知可以吸引公民参与,但会降低满意度,除了英国的面板数据外,还测试了 25 年来 34 个民主国家对民主满意度和投票率的影响。然而,对精英两极分化的较高认知也会降低人们同时对民主和投票感到满意的可能性。这些研究结果表明,人们对精英两极分化的高认知度可能不利于民主,并强调了个人对精英两极分化认知的复杂性,突出了进一步研究的必要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Electoral Studies
Electoral Studies POLITICAL SCIENCE-
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
13.00%
发文量
82
审稿时长
67 days
期刊介绍: Electoral Studies is an international journal covering all aspects of voting, the central act in the democratic process. Political scientists, economists, sociologists, game theorists, geographers, contemporary historians and lawyers have common, and overlapping, interests in what causes voters to act as they do, and the consequences. Electoral Studies provides a forum for these diverse approaches. It publishes fully refereed papers, both theoretical and empirical, on such topics as relationships between votes and seats, and between election outcomes and politicians reactions; historical, sociological, or geographical correlates of voting behaviour; rational choice analysis of political acts, and critiques of such analyses.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信