Operational message
There are currently operational disruptions. Troubleshooting is in progress.
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • apa.csl
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
What Kind of Electoral Outcome do People Think is Good for Democracy?
Department of Political Science, Université de Montréal, Montréal, QC, Canada.ORCID iD: 0000-0003-4292-110X
Department of Political Economy, King’s College London, London, UK.ORCID iD: 0000-0002-1896-1294
Department of Political Science, University of California, Riverside, Riverside, CA, USA.
School of Politics and International Relations, University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland.ORCID iD: 0000-0002-0528-4335
Show others and affiliations
2021 (English)In: Political Studies, ISSN 0032-3217, E-ISSN 1467-9248Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

There is perennial debate in comparative politics about electoral institutions, but what characterizes this debate is the lack of consideration for citizens’ perspective. In this paper, we report the results of an original survey conducted on representative samples in 15 West European countries (N = 15,414). We implemented an original instrument to elicit respondents’ views by asking them to rate “real but blind” electoral outcomes. With this survey instrument, we aimed to elicit principled rather than partisan preferences regarding the kind of electoral outcomes that citizens think is good for democracy. We find that West Europeans do not clearly endorse a majoritarian or proportional vision of democracy. They tend to focus on aspects of the government rather than parliament when they pass a judgment. They want a majority government that has few parties and enjoys wide popular support. Finally, we find only small differences between citizens of different countries.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Sage Publications, 2021.
Keywords [en]
electoral systems, government outcomes, democracy, Europe
National Category
Political Science (excluding Public Administration Studies and Globalisation Studies)
Research subject
Political Science
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:kau:diva-87011DOI: 10.1177/00323217211055560ISI: 000718285000001Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-85118789893OAI: oai:DiVA.org:kau-87011DiVA, id: diva2:1610073
Funder
Swedish Research Council, 2017-02941Available from: 2021-11-10 Created: 2021-11-10 Last updated: 2026-02-12Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

fulltext(696 kB)329 downloads
File information
File name FULLTEXT01.pdfFile size 696 kBChecksum SHA-512
232680f74fe2063a3f079afa25f016ff95cf7187c45b97183c58d602c895f81238ba714f5a0aadb39b4113682ada0a54d389a3f134d69095f2d555ae47e23647
Type fulltextMimetype application/pdf

Other links

Publisher's full textScopus

Authority records

Fredén, Annika

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Blais, AndréBol, DamienFarrell, David MFredén, AnnikaLago, IgnacioLoewen, Peter John
By organisation
Department of Political, Historical, Religious and Cultural Studies (from 2013)
In the same journal
Political Studies
Political Science (excluding Public Administration Studies and Globalisation Studies)

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar
Total: 329 downloads
The number of downloads is the sum of all downloads of full texts. It may include eg previous versions that are now no longer available

doi
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
urn-nbn
Total: 818 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • apa.csl
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf