Skip to main content

Explaining Gaps in Context

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Book cover Citizens and Democracy in Europe

Part of the book series: Palgrave Studies in European Political Sociology ((PSEPS))

  • 330 Accesses

Abstract

This chapter assesses whether gaps in political support due to education, employment position and electoral status depend on changes and country differences in input and output contextual factors. Using hierarchical models with survey data on a set of European countries between 1995/2002 and 2017, it disentangles the role of power distribution, ideological distance, quality of government, economic performance and inequality for explaining between- and within-country variation in gaps, trying to understand under what conditions they are narrower or larger. The chapter not only provides a broad analysis of how the context may moderate the role of social and political experience in political satisfaction and trust, but it also attempts to contribute to our understanding of how people form opinions through information from the political context.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 79.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Aarts, K., van Ham, C., & Thomassen, J. (2017). Modernization, globalization, and satisfaction with democracy. In C. van Ham, J. Thomassen, K. Aarts, & R. Andeweg (Eds.), Myth and Reality of the Legitimacy Crisis: Explaining Trends and Cross-National Differences in Established Democracies (pp. 37–58). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, C. J., Blais, A., Bowler, S., Donovan, T., & Listhaug, O. (2005). Losers’ Consent: Elections and Democratic Legitimacy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, C. J., & Guillory, C. A. (1997). Political institutions and satisfaction with democracy: A crossnational analysis of consensus and majoritarian systems. American Political Science Review, 91(1), 66–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, C. J., & Tverdova, Y. V. (2003). Corruption, political allegiances, and attitudes toward government in contemporary democracies. American Journal of Political Science, 47(1), 91–109.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, C. J., & Singer, M. M. (2008). The sensitive left and the impervious right: Multilevel models and the politics of inequality, ideology, and legitimacy in Europe. Comparative Political Studies, 41, 564–599.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bartels, L. M. (2002). Beyond the running tally: Partisan bias in political perceptions. Political Behavior, 24(2), 117–150.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bartels, B. (2015). Beyond ‘fixed versus random effects’: A framework for improving substantive and statistical analysis of panel, TSCS, and multilevel data. In R. J. Franzese (Ed.), Quantitative Research in Political Science. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bell, A., & Jones, K. (2015). Explaining fixed effects: Random effects modeling of time-series cross-sectional and panel data. Political Science Research and Methods, 3(1), 133–153.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bernauer, J., & Vatter, A. (2012). Can’t get no satisfaction with the Westminster model? Winners, losers and the effects of consensual and direct democratic institutions on satisfaction with democracy. European Journal of Political Research, 51(4), 435–468.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berry, W. D., Golder, M., & Milton, D. (2012). Improving tests of theories positing interactions. Journal of Politics, 74(3), 653–671.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Curini, L., Jou, W., & Memoli, V. (2012). Satisfaction with democracy and the winner/loser debate: The role of policy preferences and past experience. British Journal of Political Science, 42, 241–261.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dahlberg, S., & Holmberg, S. (2014). Democracy and bureaucracy: How their quality matters for popular satisfaction. West European Politics, 37, 515–537.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dahlberg, S., & Linde, J. (2016). Losing happily? The mitigating effect of democracy and quality of government on the winner–loser gap in political support. International Journal of Public Administration, 39(9), 652–664.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dalton, R. J. (2005). The social transformation of trust in government. International Review of Sociology, 15, 133–154.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Donovan, T., & Karp, J. (2017). Electoral rules, corruption, inequality and evaluations of democracy. European Journal of Political Research, 56(3), 469–486.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dotti Sani, G. M., & Magistro, B. (2016). Increasingly unequal? The economic crisis, social inequalities and trust in the European Parliament in 20 European countries. European Journal of Political Research, 55(2), 246–264.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Enns, P. K., & McAvoy, G. E. (2012). The role of partisanship in aggregate opinion. Political Behavior, 34, 627–651.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Esaiasson, P. (2011). Electoral losers revisited—How citizens react to defeat at the ballot box. Electoral Studies, 30(1), 102–113.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ezrow, L., & Xezonakis, G. (2011). Citizen satisfaction with democracy and parties’ policy offerings. Comparative Political Studies, 44, 1152–1178.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fairbrother, M. (2014). Two multilevel modeling techniques for analyzing comparative longitudinal survey datasets. Political Science Research and Methods, 2(1), 119–140.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gelman, A., & Hill, J. (2006). Data Analysis Using Regression and Multilevel/Hierarchical Models. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Gerber, A., & Green, D. (1999). Misperceptions about perceptual bias. Annual Review of Political Science, 2, 189–210.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gomez, B. T., & Wilson, J. M. (2001). Political sophistication and economic voting in the American electorate: A theory of heterogeneous attribution. American Journal of Political Science, 45, 899–914.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Green, D., Palmquist, B., & Schicker, E. (2002). Partisan Hearts and Minds. New Haven: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hakhverdian, A., & Mayne, Q. (2012). Institutional trust, education, and corruption: A micro-macro interactive approach. Journal of Politics, 74(3), 739–750.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lijphart, A. (1999). Patterns of Democracy: Government Forms and Performance in Thirty-Six Countries. New Haven: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martini, S., & Quaranta, M. (2019). Political support among winners and losers: Within- and between-country effects of structure, process and performance in Europe. European Journal of Political Research, 58(1), 341–361.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mayne, Q., & Hakhverdian, A. (2016). Ideological congruence and citizen satisfaction: Evidence from 25 advanced democracies. Comparative Political Studies, 50(6), 822–849.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mayne, Q., & Hakhverdian, A. (2017). Education, socialization, and political trust. In S. Zmerli & T. W. G. van der Meer (Eds.), Handbook on Political Trust. Northampton: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Quaranta, M., & Martini, S. (2016). Does the economy really matter for satisfaction with democracy? Longitudinal and cross-country evidence from the European Union. Electoral Studies, 42, 164–174.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Singh, S. (2014). Not all election winners are equal: Satisfaction with democracy and the nature of the vote. European Journal of Political Research, 53(2), 308–327.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Elsas, E. (2015). Political trust as a rational attitude: A comparison of the nature of political trust across different levels of education. Political Studies, 63, 1158–1178.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Erkel, P. E., & van der Meer, T. W. G. (2016). Macroeconomic performance, political trust and the great recession: A multilevel analysis of the effects of within-country fluctuations in macroeconomic performance on political trust in 15 EU countries, 1999–2011. European Journal of Political Research, 55(1), 177–197.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van der Meer, T. W. G., & Hakhverdian, A. (2017). Political trust as the evaluation of process and performance: A cross-national study of forty-two European democracies. Political Studies, 65(1), 81–102.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wagner, A. F., Schneider, F., & Halla, M. (2009). The quality of institutions and satisfaction with democracy in Western Europe: A panel analysis. European Journal of Political Economy, 25(1), 30–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mario Quaranta .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Martini, S., Quaranta, M. (2020). Explaining Gaps in Context. In: Citizens and Democracy in Europe. Palgrave Studies in European Political Sociology. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-21633-7_8

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics