回避、模糊、交替:多维竞争中的位置模糊策略

IF 2.9 1区 社会学 Q1 POLITICAL SCIENCE
J. Koedam
{"title":"回避、模糊、交替:多维竞争中的位置模糊策略","authors":"J. Koedam","doi":"10.1177/14651165211027472","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In a multidimensional environment, parties may have compelling incentives to obscure their preferences on select issues. This study contributes to a growing literature on position blurring by demonstrating how party leaders purposively create uncertainty about where their party stands on the issue of European integration. By doing so, it theoretically and empirically disentangles the cause of position blurring—parties’ strategic behavior—from its intended political outcome. The analysis of survey and manifesto data across 14 Western European countries (1999–2019) confirms that three distinct strategies—avoidance, ambiguity, and alternation—all increase expert uncertainty about a party's position. This finding is then unpacked by examining for whom avoidance is particularly effective. This study has important implications for our understanding of party strategy, democratic representation, and political accountability.","PeriodicalId":12077,"journal":{"name":"European Union Politics","volume":"22 1","pages":"655 - 675"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2021-07-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/14651165211027472","citationCount":"5","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Avoidance, ambiguity, alternation: Position blurring strategies in multidimensional party competition\",\"authors\":\"J. Koedam\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/14651165211027472\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In a multidimensional environment, parties may have compelling incentives to obscure their preferences on select issues. This study contributes to a growing literature on position blurring by demonstrating how party leaders purposively create uncertainty about where their party stands on the issue of European integration. By doing so, it theoretically and empirically disentangles the cause of position blurring—parties’ strategic behavior—from its intended political outcome. The analysis of survey and manifesto data across 14 Western European countries (1999–2019) confirms that three distinct strategies—avoidance, ambiguity, and alternation—all increase expert uncertainty about a party's position. This finding is then unpacked by examining for whom avoidance is particularly effective. This study has important implications for our understanding of party strategy, democratic representation, and political accountability.\",\"PeriodicalId\":12077,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Union Politics\",\"volume\":\"22 1\",\"pages\":\"655 - 675\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-07-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/14651165211027472\",\"citationCount\":\"5\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Union Politics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/14651165211027472\",\"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 Union Politics","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14651165211027472","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: 5

摘要

在一个多层面的环境中,各方可能有令人信服的动机来掩盖他们在特定问题上的偏好。这项研究通过展示政党领导人如何有目的地制造他们的政党在欧洲一体化问题上的立场的不确定性,为越来越多的关于立场模糊的文献做出了贡献。通过这样做,它从理论和经验上解开了立场模糊的原因——政党的战略行为——与其预期的政治结果。对14个西欧国家(1999-2009)的调查和宣言数据的分析证实,三种不同的策略——回避、模糊和交替——都增加了专家对政党立场的不确定性。然后,通过检查回避对谁特别有效来揭示这一发现。这项研究对我们理解政党战略、民主代表制和政治问责制具有重要意义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Avoidance, ambiguity, alternation: Position blurring strategies in multidimensional party competition
In a multidimensional environment, parties may have compelling incentives to obscure their preferences on select issues. This study contributes to a growing literature on position blurring by demonstrating how party leaders purposively create uncertainty about where their party stands on the issue of European integration. By doing so, it theoretically and empirically disentangles the cause of position blurring—parties’ strategic behavior—from its intended political outcome. The analysis of survey and manifesto data across 14 Western European countries (1999–2019) confirms that three distinct strategies—avoidance, ambiguity, and alternation—all increase expert uncertainty about a party's position. This finding is then unpacked by examining for whom avoidance is particularly effective. This study has important implications for our understanding of party strategy, democratic representation, and political accountability.
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
European Union Politics
European Union Politics POLITICAL SCIENCE-
CiteScore
4.70
自引率
21.70%
发文量
37
期刊介绍: European Union Politics is an international academic journal for advanced peer-reviewed research and scholarship on all aspects of the process of government, politics and policy in the European Union. It aims to stimulate debate and provide a forum to bridge the theoretical and empirical analysis on the political unification of Europe. It represents no particular school or approach, nor is it wedded to any particular methodology. In particular it welcomes articles that offer a new theoretical argument, analyze original data in a novel fashion or present an innovative methodological approach. The Editors invite submissions from all sub-fields of contemporary political science, including international relations, comparative politics, public administration, public policy and political theory.
×
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