Elections with candidate filtering and two mechanisms of demobilization effect: the prologue to Hong Kong’s authoritarian turn

IF 2 3区 社会学 Q2 POLITICAL SCIENCE
Chan Ka Ming, Ng Ka Lun
{"title":"Elections with candidate filtering and two mechanisms of demobilization effect: the prologue to Hong Kong’s authoritarian turn","authors":"Chan Ka Ming, Ng Ka Lun","doi":"10.1080/17457289.2022.2051150","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Previous studies of electoral authoritarianism identified that manipulations demobilize opposition supporters. Yet, less is known about whether radicals are more prone to abstention than moderates in manipulated elections. To answer this question, we disentangle two mechanisms of demobilization effect—the efficacy mechanism and the electoral supply mechanism—that have different expectations on the turnout rate of radicals and moderates. Our research leverages the disqualification controversy in Hong Kong in 2016, after which radical candidates who advocate self-determination or independence were filtered out from the electoral market. Using both aggregate-level and individual-level data, our analysis shows that a substantive demobilization effect exists. Crucially, we find that radicals and moderates are demobilized to a similar extent, and the decreases in perceived electoral fairness and importance of voting are similar between the two factions. These findings suggest that the efficacy mechanism is a more plausible explanation of the demobilization effect. Overall, this study extends our understanding of voting behavior and political attitude of opposition supporters in face of autocratization.","PeriodicalId":46791,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Elections Public Opinion and Parties","volume":"380 1","pages":"664 - 683"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-03-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Elections Public Opinion and Parties","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17457289.2022.2051150","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","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 Previous studies of electoral authoritarianism identified that manipulations demobilize opposition supporters. Yet, less is known about whether radicals are more prone to abstention than moderates in manipulated elections. To answer this question, we disentangle two mechanisms of demobilization effect—the efficacy mechanism and the electoral supply mechanism—that have different expectations on the turnout rate of radicals and moderates. Our research leverages the disqualification controversy in Hong Kong in 2016, after which radical candidates who advocate self-determination or independence were filtered out from the electoral market. Using both aggregate-level and individual-level data, our analysis shows that a substantive demobilization effect exists. Crucially, we find that radicals and moderates are demobilized to a similar extent, and the decreases in perceived electoral fairness and importance of voting are similar between the two factions. These findings suggest that the efficacy mechanism is a more plausible explanation of the demobilization effect. Overall, this study extends our understanding of voting behavior and political attitude of opposition supporters in face of autocratization.
候选人筛选和两种机制的复员效应:香港威权转向的序幕
先前对选举威权主义的研究发现,操纵会使反对派支持者复员。然而,在被操纵的选举中,激进派是否比温和派更倾向于弃权,人们知之甚少。为了回答这一问题,我们梳理了对激进派和温和派投票率有不同预期的两种复员效应机制——效能机制和选举供给机制。我们的研究利用了2016年香港的取消资格争议,在此之后,主张自决或独立的激进候选人从选举市场中被过滤掉。通过使用总体和个人层面的数据,我们的分析表明,存在实质性的遣散效应。至关重要的是,我们发现激进派和温和派被遣散的程度相似,两个派别在感知选举公平性和投票重要性方面的下降相似。这些发现表明,复员效应的功效机制是一个更合理的解释。总体而言,本研究扩展了我们对反对派支持者在独裁统治下的投票行为和政治态度的理解。
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
4.00
自引率
5.60%
发文量
21
×
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