
Fulltext:
77311.pdf
Embargo:
until further notice
Size:
206.8Kb
Format:
PDF
Description:
publisher's version
Publication year
2009Number of pages
32 p.
Source
Comparative Political Studies, 42, 11, (2009), pp. 1426-1457ISSN
Publication type
Article / Letter to editor

Display more detailsDisplay less details
Organization
SW OZ RSCR SOC
SW OZ NISCO MT
Journal title
Comparative Political Studies
Volume
vol. 42
Issue
iss. 11
Languages used
English (eng)
Page start
p. 1426
Page end
p. 1457
Subject
Inequality, cohesion and modernization; Ongelijkheid, cohesie en moderniseringAbstract
Modern liberal democracies demand high and equal levels of political action. Unequal levels of political action between ideological groups may ultimately lead to biased policy. But to what extent do citizens' ideological preferences affect their likelihood to participate politically? And does the institutional environment moderate this relationship? From rivaling theories, the authors construct hypotheses regarding the relationship between ideological preferences and participation and those regarding the moderating effect of state institutions. They test them for six modes of political action-voting, contacting, campaigning, cooperating, persuading, and protesting-through multilevel analyses of 27 elections in 20 Western democracies. First, they find that citizens' ideological preferences are an important determinant political action. Second, they find that majoritarianism outperforms consensualism: In majoritarian systems, political action is more widespread and not less equal across the crucial factor of ideological preferences. The field should therefore reconsider Lijphart's conclusions about the superiority of consensualism.
This item appears in the following Collection(s)
- Academic publications [227881]
- Electronic publications [107344]
- Faculty of Social Sciences [28470]
Upload full text
Use your RU credentials (u/z-number and password) to log in with SURFconext to upload a file for processing by the repository team.