部落政治还是选民眼光?地方选举中的政党与政策

IF 2.4 3区 社会学 Q2 URBAN STUDIES
Danielle Joesten Martin, Brian E. Adams, Edward L. Lascher
{"title":"部落政治还是选民眼光?地方选举中的政党与政策","authors":"Danielle Joesten Martin, Brian E. Adams, Edward L. Lascher","doi":"10.1177/10780874241252757","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"How do voters react to local candidates who share their policy views but not their party identification, and vice versa? This paper presents findings from a survey experiment that cross-pressured respondents to choose between a co-partisan candidate who does not share their policy views (on housing and homelessness) and an opposing party candidate with some ideological affinity. The majority of respondents chose party over policy, indicating they would vote for co-partisans even if the candidate from the opposing party is closer to their policy positions. However, significant minorities defected and in some circumstances most did. Weak partisans, those with stronger policy views, and those who viewed the issues as highly salient were more likely to defect from their party when cross-pressured. Our findings support revising the expectation that partisanship always takes precedence over policy views and reinforces the view that partisanship may operate differently at the local level.","PeriodicalId":51427,"journal":{"name":"Urban Affairs Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Tribal Politics or Discerning Voters? Party and Policy in Local Elections\",\"authors\":\"Danielle Joesten Martin, Brian E. Adams, Edward L. Lascher\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/10780874241252757\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"How do voters react to local candidates who share their policy views but not their party identification, and vice versa? This paper presents findings from a survey experiment that cross-pressured respondents to choose between a co-partisan candidate who does not share their policy views (on housing and homelessness) and an opposing party candidate with some ideological affinity. The majority of respondents chose party over policy, indicating they would vote for co-partisans even if the candidate from the opposing party is closer to their policy positions. However, significant minorities defected and in some circumstances most did. Weak partisans, those with stronger policy views, and those who viewed the issues as highly salient were more likely to defect from their party when cross-pressured. Our findings support revising the expectation that partisanship always takes precedence over policy views and reinforces the view that partisanship may operate differently at the local level.\",\"PeriodicalId\":51427,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Urban Affairs Review\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Urban Affairs Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/10780874241252757\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"URBAN STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Urban Affairs Review","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10780874241252757","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"URBAN STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

选民对与自己政策观点相同但不认同自己党派的地方候选人有何反应,反之亦然?本文介绍了一项调查实验的结果,该实验交叉施压,要求受访者在与自己政策观点(关于住房和无家可归问题)不一致的共同党派候选人和在意识形态上有一定亲和力的对立党派候选人之间做出选择。大多数受访者选择了党派而非政策,表明即使对立党派的候选人更接近他们的政策立场,他们也会把票投给共同党派的候选人。然而,也有相当少数的人投了反对票,在某些情况下,大多数人都投了反对票。党性较弱、政策观点较强以及认为问题非常突出的人在受到交叉压力时更有可能叛党。我们的研究结果支持修正党派性总是优先于政策观点的预期,并强化了党派性在地方层面可能以不同方式运作的观点。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Tribal Politics or Discerning Voters? Party and Policy in Local Elections
How do voters react to local candidates who share their policy views but not their party identification, and vice versa? This paper presents findings from a survey experiment that cross-pressured respondents to choose between a co-partisan candidate who does not share their policy views (on housing and homelessness) and an opposing party candidate with some ideological affinity. The majority of respondents chose party over policy, indicating they would vote for co-partisans even if the candidate from the opposing party is closer to their policy positions. However, significant minorities defected and in some circumstances most did. Weak partisans, those with stronger policy views, and those who viewed the issues as highly salient were more likely to defect from their party when cross-pressured. Our findings support revising the expectation that partisanship always takes precedence over policy views and reinforces the view that partisanship may operate differently at the local level.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Urban Affairs Review
Urban Affairs Review URBAN STUDIES-
CiteScore
5.50
自引率
14.30%
发文量
48
期刊介绍: Urban Affairs Reveiw (UAR) is a leading scholarly journal on urban issues and themes. For almost five decades scholars, researchers, policymakers, planners, and administrators have turned to UAR for the latest international research and empirical analysis on the programs and policies that shape our cities. UAR covers: urban policy; urban economic development; residential and community development; governance and service delivery; comparative/international urban research; and social, spatial, and cultural dynamics.
×
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