Coethnicity Beyond Clientelism: Insights from an Experimental Study of Political Behavior in Lebanon

IF 1.3 1区 哲学 Q2 POLITICAL SCIENCE
Melani Cammett, Dominika Kruszewska-Eduardo, Christiana Parreira, Sami Atallah
{"title":"Coethnicity Beyond Clientelism: Insights from an Experimental Study of Political Behavior in Lebanon","authors":"Melani Cammett, Dominika Kruszewska-Eduardo, Christiana Parreira, Sami Atallah","doi":"10.1017/S1755048321000201","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract A large literature finds that coethnicity primarily shapes voter behavior through material exchanges, particularly clientelism. Yet identity groups provide distinct psychological and social benefits that also compel people to vote based on coethnicity. Does coethnicity matter for vote choice, net of instrumental considerations? We address this question using a conjoint experiment in Lebanon, which asked a nationally representative sample of citizens to choose between potential candidates in national elections. We find that coethnicity is the single strongest predictor of electoral support, more important than party affiliation, provision of clientelism, or programmatic platform. Coethnicity does not significantly alter perceptions of candidates who provide clientelism, including high-value goods like patronage employment. Furthermore, citizens who feel closer to their ethnic group are more likely to vote on the basis of coethnicity, as are those with lower levels of trust in state institutions. Collectively, these findings suggest that coethnic voting in diverse polities is not driven solely by clientelism, but also by less immediately material concerns about security and belonging.","PeriodicalId":45674,"journal":{"name":"Politics and Religion","volume":"34 1","pages":"417 - 438"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2021-11-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Politics and Religion","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S1755048321000201","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Abstract A large literature finds that coethnicity primarily shapes voter behavior through material exchanges, particularly clientelism. Yet identity groups provide distinct psychological and social benefits that also compel people to vote based on coethnicity. Does coethnicity matter for vote choice, net of instrumental considerations? We address this question using a conjoint experiment in Lebanon, which asked a nationally representative sample of citizens to choose between potential candidates in national elections. We find that coethnicity is the single strongest predictor of electoral support, more important than party affiliation, provision of clientelism, or programmatic platform. Coethnicity does not significantly alter perceptions of candidates who provide clientelism, including high-value goods like patronage employment. Furthermore, citizens who feel closer to their ethnic group are more likely to vote on the basis of coethnicity, as are those with lower levels of trust in state institutions. Collectively, these findings suggest that coethnic voting in diverse polities is not driven solely by clientelism, but also by less immediately material concerns about security and belonging.
超越庇护主义的同族性:来自黎巴嫩政治行为实验研究的见解
大量文献发现,同族性主要通过物质交换,特别是裙带关系来塑造选民行为。然而,身份群体提供了独特的心理和社会利益,这也迫使人们根据同种族进行投票。撇开工具因素不谈,种族同一性对投票选择有影响吗?我们通过在黎巴嫩进行的一项联合实验来解决这个问题,该实验要求具有全国代表性的公民样本在全国选举中的潜在候选人之间进行选择。我们发现,同种族是选举支持的单一最强预测因子,比党派关系、提供庇护主义或纲领平台更重要。同种族并没有显著改变人们对提供庇护主义的候选人的看法,包括提供赞助就业等高价值商品的候选人。此外,那些感觉与自己的种族更亲近的公民更有可能基于种族融合进行投票,对国家机构信任度较低的公民也是如此。总的来说,这些发现表明,在不同的政治体制中,同族投票不仅仅是由庇护主义驱动的,而且还受到对安全和归属感的不那么直接的物质担忧的影响。
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
CiteScore
3.00
自引率
13.30%
发文量
34
审稿时长
8 weeks
期刊介绍: Politics and Religion is an international journal publishing high quality peer-reviewed research on the multifaceted relationship between religion and politics around the world. The scope of published work is intentionally broad and we invite innovative work from all methodological approaches in the major subfields of political science, including international relations, American politics, comparative politics, and political theory, that seeks to improve our understanding of religion’s role in some aspect of world politics. The Editors invite normative and empirical investigations of the public representation of religion, the religious and political institutions that shape religious presence in the public square, and the role of religion in shaping citizenship, broadly considered, as well as pieces that attempt to advance our methodological tools for examining religious influence in political life.
×
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