Effects of a politician’s reputation for providing electoral clientelism: A theory with evidence from Brazil

IF 2.7 2区社会学 Q1 POLITICAL SCIENCE

Electoral Studies Pub Date : 2026-02-01 Epub Date: 2026-01-10 DOI:10.1016/j.electstud.2026.103043

Eduardo Mello , Will Jennings , Lawrence McKay , Oto Montagner

{"title":"Effects of a politician’s reputation for providing electoral clientelism: A theory with evidence from Brazil","authors":"Eduardo Mello , Will Jennings , Lawrence McKay , Oto Montagner","doi":"10.1016/j.electstud.2026.103043","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>This article offers a new theory of how reputations for electoral clientelism affect voter behaviour. Existing accounts emphasise direct exchanges between candidates and clients, but often overlook how broader audiences evaluate these practices. We develop a formal model showing that voters’ preferences over clientelistic candidates are shaped by their trust in political institutions: when trust is low, voters—whether clients or not—may view clientelism as a credible signal of goodwill and effectiveness. When trust is high, they favour programmatic candidates instead. We test the model’s predictions through a conjoint survey experiment conducted with 2148 Brazilian voters. We find that reputations for clientelism increase electoral support, especially among citizens with lower institutional trust. The findings advance theories of clientelism and electoral accountability by incorporating public perceptions, not just private exchanges, into the strategic calculus of candidates and voters.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48188,"journal":{"name":"Electoral Studies","volume":"99 ","pages":"Article 103043"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2026-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Electoral Studies","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0261379426000016","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/1/10 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

This article offers a new theory of how reputations for electoral clientelism affect voter behaviour. Existing accounts emphasise direct exchanges between candidates and clients, but often overlook how broader audiences evaluate these practices. We develop a formal model showing that voters’ preferences over clientelistic candidates are shaped by their trust in political institutions: when trust is low, voters—whether clients or not—may view clientelism as a credible signal of goodwill and effectiveness. When trust is high, they favour programmatic candidates instead. We test the model’s predictions through a conjoint survey experiment conducted with 2148 Brazilian voters. We find that reputations for clientelism increase electoral support, especially among citizens with lower institutional trust. The findings advance theories of clientelism and electoral accountability by incorporating public perceptions, not just private exchanges, into the strategic calculus of candidates and voters.

查看原文本刊更多论文

政治家提供选举庇护主义的声誉的影响：一个有巴西证据的理论

这篇文章提供了一种新的理论，说明选举庇护主义的声誉如何影响选民的行为。现有的描述强调候选人和客户之间的直接交流，但往往忽视了更广泛的受众如何评价这些做法。我们开发了一个正式的模型，表明选民对庇护主义候选人的偏好是由他们对政治机构的信任决定的：当信任度低时，选民——无论是否为客户——可能会将庇护主义视为善意和有效性的可靠信号。当信任度较高时，他们转而青睐纲领性候选人。我们通过对2148名巴西选民进行的联合调查实验来测试模型的预测。我们发现，裙带关系的名声增加了选举支持，尤其是在机构信任度较低的公民中。通过将公众的看法（而不仅仅是私人交流）纳入候选人和选民的战略考量，研究结果推进了裙带主义和选举问责制理论。

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 POLITICAL SCIENCE-

CiteScore

3.40

自引率

13.00%

发文量

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.