如你所愿?公众对代表模式的偏好与国会议员的角色定位

IF 4.2 1区 社会学 Q1 POLITICAL SCIENCE
PHILIPPE MONGRAIN, NINO JUNIUS, NATHALIE BRACK
{"title":"如你所愿?公众对代表模式的偏好与国会议员的角色定位","authors":"PHILIPPE MONGRAIN,&nbsp;NINO JUNIUS,&nbsp;NATHALIE BRACK","doi":"10.1111/1475-6765.12734","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>How much autonomy elected representatives should have in looking after the interests of their constituents is a central question of democratic theory. While much research has been conducted on the representational roles adopted by elected representatives, we currently lack an understanding of citizens’ preferences for contrasting models of representation, more specifically whether they believe representatives should primarily act as instructed delegates, closely following public opinion or rather as trustees, relying on their own convictions and judgement. As a result, we know relatively little about how congruent citizens’ and politicians’ representational preferences are, whether some subgroups of citizens and politicians are more congruent with each other than others and whether citizens’ and politicians’ representational preferences are driven by the same determinants. Using data from 13 countries, we assess the level of congruence between voters’ and MPs’ preferences in representational style. In all countries, citizens favouring delegate-style MPs are poorly represented as the vast majority of representatives display a moderate to strong preference for trusteeship. Analysing subgroups of politicians and citizens according to party family, ideology, inclusion in government, populism and social class reveals that MPs from left-wing or right-wing radical and populist parties, representatives sitting on the opposition benches and those belonging to lower classes tend to hold representational preferences that are more in line with the preferences of their own supporters or individuals belonging to the same group as themselves, but also with those of the entire electorate. However, even among these politicians there are few delegates. Examining whether citizens’ and politicians’ representational preferences are driven by similar determinants, we assessed the influence of their ideological orientations, socioeconomic status and support for (or affiliation with) a party in government on their representational preferences. For citizens, our results indicate that locating oneself on the right of the ideological spectrum is related to higher scores on the delegate–trustee scale, while supporting a populist party seems to decrease voters’ favourability toward trusteeship. Politicians’ preferences could not be explained by similar factors as none of the tested factors were significant. In line with our congruence analysis, there seems to be little variation in MPs’ representational preferences. Even groups of MPs that can be thought of as most likely to be delegates turn out to be staunch trustees, potentially causing frustration among citizens preferring delegate-style representation.</p>","PeriodicalId":48273,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Political Research","volume":"64 3","pages":"1208-1232"},"PeriodicalIF":4.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"As you wish? Public preferences for models of representation and MPs’ role orientations\",\"authors\":\"PHILIPPE MONGRAIN,&nbsp;NINO JUNIUS,&nbsp;NATHALIE BRACK\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/1475-6765.12734\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>How much autonomy elected representatives should have in looking after the interests of their constituents is a central question of democratic theory. While much research has been conducted on the representational roles adopted by elected representatives, we currently lack an understanding of citizens’ preferences for contrasting models of representation, more specifically whether they believe representatives should primarily act as instructed delegates, closely following public opinion or rather as trustees, relying on their own convictions and judgement. As a result, we know relatively little about how congruent citizens’ and politicians’ representational preferences are, whether some subgroups of citizens and politicians are more congruent with each other than others and whether citizens’ and politicians’ representational preferences are driven by the same determinants. Using data from 13 countries, we assess the level of congruence between voters’ and MPs’ preferences in representational style. In all countries, citizens favouring delegate-style MPs are poorly represented as the vast majority of representatives display a moderate to strong preference for trusteeship. Analysing subgroups of politicians and citizens according to party family, ideology, inclusion in government, populism and social class reveals that MPs from left-wing or right-wing radical and populist parties, representatives sitting on the opposition benches and those belonging to lower classes tend to hold representational preferences that are more in line with the preferences of their own supporters or individuals belonging to the same group as themselves, but also with those of the entire electorate. However, even among these politicians there are few delegates. Examining whether citizens’ and politicians’ representational preferences are driven by similar determinants, we assessed the influence of their ideological orientations, socioeconomic status and support for (or affiliation with) a party in government on their representational preferences. For citizens, our results indicate that locating oneself on the right of the ideological spectrum is related to higher scores on the delegate–trustee scale, while supporting a populist party seems to decrease voters’ favourability toward trusteeship. Politicians’ preferences could not be explained by similar factors as none of the tested factors were significant. In line with our congruence analysis, there seems to be little variation in MPs’ representational preferences. Even groups of MPs that can be thought of as most likely to be delegates turn out to be staunch trustees, potentially causing frustration among citizens preferring delegate-style representation.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48273,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Journal of Political Research\",\"volume\":\"64 3\",\"pages\":\"1208-1232\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Journal of Political Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://ejpr.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1475-6765.12734\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"POLITICAL SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Political Research","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://ejpr.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1475-6765.12734","RegionNum":1,"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

摘要

民选代表在照顾选民利益方面应该有多大的自主权,是民主理论的一个核心问题。虽然对当选代表所扮演的代表角色进行了大量研究,但我们目前对公民对不同代表模式的偏好缺乏了解,更具体地说,他们是否认为代表应该主要作为指示代表,密切关注公众舆论,还是作为受托人,依靠自己的信念和判断。因此,我们对公民和政治家的代表性偏好有多一致知之甚少,是否一些公民和政治家的子群体比其他群体更一致,公民和政治家的代表性偏好是否由相同的决定因素驱动。使用来自13个国家的数据,我们评估了选民和议员在代表性风格方面的偏好之间的一致性水平。在所有国家,赞成代议制议员的公民代表性都很差,因为绝大多数代表对托管制表现出中度到强烈的偏好。根据政党家庭、意识形态、政府成员、民粹主义和社会阶层对政客和公民的子群体进行分析,结果显示,来自左翼或右翼激进和民粹主义政党的议员、坐在反对派席位上的代表以及那些属于较低阶层的人倾向于持有代表偏好,这些偏好更符合他们自己的支持者或属于同一群体的个人的偏好。但也包括全体选民。然而,即使在这些政治家中,也很少有代表。为了考察公民和政治家的代表性偏好是否受到类似决定因素的驱动,我们评估了他们的意识形态取向、社会经济地位和对政府中某一政党的支持(或隶属关系)对其代表性偏好的影响。对于公民而言,我们的研究结果表明,在意识形态光谱上处于右倾的人在委托-受托人量表上的得分较高,而支持民粹主义政党似乎会降低选民对受托人的好感度。政治家的偏好不能用相似的因素来解释,因为没有一个测试的因素是显著的。根据我们的一致性分析,国会议员的代表性偏好似乎没有什么变化。即使是那些被认为最有可能成为代表的国会议员群体,也被证明是坚定的受托人,这可能会让那些喜欢委托式代表的公民感到沮丧。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

As you wish? Public preferences for models of representation and MPs’ role orientations

As you wish? Public preferences for models of representation and MPs’ role orientations

As you wish? Public preferences for models of representation and MPs’ role orientations

As you wish? Public preferences for models of representation and MPs’ role orientations

How much autonomy elected representatives should have in looking after the interests of their constituents is a central question of democratic theory. While much research has been conducted on the representational roles adopted by elected representatives, we currently lack an understanding of citizens’ preferences for contrasting models of representation, more specifically whether they believe representatives should primarily act as instructed delegates, closely following public opinion or rather as trustees, relying on their own convictions and judgement. As a result, we know relatively little about how congruent citizens’ and politicians’ representational preferences are, whether some subgroups of citizens and politicians are more congruent with each other than others and whether citizens’ and politicians’ representational preferences are driven by the same determinants. Using data from 13 countries, we assess the level of congruence between voters’ and MPs’ preferences in representational style. In all countries, citizens favouring delegate-style MPs are poorly represented as the vast majority of representatives display a moderate to strong preference for trusteeship. Analysing subgroups of politicians and citizens according to party family, ideology, inclusion in government, populism and social class reveals that MPs from left-wing or right-wing radical and populist parties, representatives sitting on the opposition benches and those belonging to lower classes tend to hold representational preferences that are more in line with the preferences of their own supporters or individuals belonging to the same group as themselves, but also with those of the entire electorate. However, even among these politicians there are few delegates. Examining whether citizens’ and politicians’ representational preferences are driven by similar determinants, we assessed the influence of their ideological orientations, socioeconomic status and support for (or affiliation with) a party in government on their representational preferences. For citizens, our results indicate that locating oneself on the right of the ideological spectrum is related to higher scores on the delegate–trustee scale, while supporting a populist party seems to decrease voters’ favourability toward trusteeship. Politicians’ preferences could not be explained by similar factors as none of the tested factors were significant. In line with our congruence analysis, there seems to be little variation in MPs’ representational preferences. Even groups of MPs that can be thought of as most likely to be delegates turn out to be staunch trustees, potentially causing frustration among citizens preferring delegate-style representation.

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
CiteScore
10.00
自引率
5.70%
发文量
67
期刊介绍: European Journal of Political Research specialises in articles articulating theoretical and comparative perspectives in political science, and welcomes both quantitative and qualitative approaches. EJPR also publishes short research notes outlining ongoing research in more specific areas of research. The Journal includes the Political Data Yearbook, published as a double issue at the end of each volume.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信