Book contents
- Contested Representation
- SSRC Anxieties of Democracy
- Sponsored by the Social Science Research Council
- Contested Representation
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Contributors
- Acknowledgments
- 1 Introduction
- Part I The Contested Idea of Political Representation
- Part II Representation and Responsiveness in Unequal Societies
- Part III Polarization, New Cleavages, and Shifts in Democratic Government
- Part IV Constitutional Crisis and Institutional Reform
- Bibliography
- Index
- References
Bibliography
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 03 November 2022
Book contents
- Contested Representation
- SSRC Anxieties of Democracy
- Sponsored by the Social Science Research Council
- Contested Representation
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Contributors
- Acknowledgments
- 1 Introduction
- Part I The Contested Idea of Political Representation
- Part II Representation and Responsiveness in Unequal Societies
- Part III Polarization, New Cleavages, and Shifts in Democratic Government
- Part IV Constitutional Crisis and Institutional Reform
- Bibliography
- Index
- References
Summary
A summary is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Contested RepresentationChallenges, Shortcomings and Reforms, pp. 295 - 334Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2022
References
Abdullah, Carolyne, Karpowitz, Christopher F., and Raphael, Chad. 2016. “Affinity Groups, Enclave Deliberation, and Equity.” Journal of Public Deliberation 12(2): 1–40.Google Scholar
Abizadeh, Arash. 2020. “Representation, Bicameralism, Political Equality, and Sortition: Reconstituting the Second Chamber as a Randomly Selected Assembly.” Perspectives on Politics 19(3): 1–16.Google Scholar
Abrajano, Marisa, and Poole, Keith T.. 2011. “Assessing the Ethnic and Racial Diversity of American Public Opinion.” In Who Gets Represented? ed. Enns, Peter K. and Wlezien, Christopher. New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 32–60.Google Scholar
Abramowitz, Alan. 2018. The Great Alignment: Race, Party Transformation, and the Rise of Donald Trump. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Abramson, Paul R., and Aldrich, John H.. 1982. “The Decline of Electoral Participation in America.” American Political Science Review 76(3): 502–521.Google Scholar
Achen, Christopher H., and Bartels, Larry M.. 2016. Democracy for Realists: Why Elections Do Not Produce Responsive Government. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Ackerman, Bruce, and Fishkin, James S.. 2004. Deliberation Day. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Adams, James, and Ezrow, Lawrence. 2009. “Who Do European Parties Represent?: How Western European Parties Represent the Policy Preferences of Opinion Leaders.” Journal of Politics 71(1): 206–223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Adler, David, and Ansell, Ben. 2020. “Housing and Populism.” West European Politics 43(2): 344–65.Google Scholar
Adler, Kayla. 2019. “Elise Stefanik Wants the Unthinkable: More Women in the GOP.” City and State New York (November 18, 2019). www.cityandstateny.com/personality/2019/11/elise-stefanik-wants-the-unthinkable-more-women-in-the-gop/176704/Google Scholar
Aldrich, John H., Sullivan, John L., and Borgida, Eugene. 1989. “Foreign Affairs and Issue Voting: Do Presidential Candidates ‘Waltz Before a Blind Audience?’” American Political Science Review 83(1): 123–141.Google Scholar
Alexander, Amy C., and Welzel, Christian. 2017. “The Myth of Deconsolidation: Rising Liberalism and the Populist Reaction.” ILE Working Paper Series.Google Scholar
Allen, Nicholas, Magni, Gabriele, Searing, Donald, and Warncke, Philip. 2020. “What Is a Career Politician? Theories, Concepts, and Measures.” European Political Science Review 12(2): 199–217.Google Scholar
Alter, Karen J., and Zürn, Michael. 2020. “Conceptualising Backlash Politics: Introductions to a Special Issie on Backlash Politics in Comparison.” British Journal of Politics and International Relations 22(4): 563–584.Google Scholar
Althaus, Scott L. 2003. Collective Preferences in Democratic Politics. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Amenta, Edwin, Carruthers, Bruce G., and Zylan, Yvonne. 1992. “A Hero for the Aged? The Townsend Movement, the Political Mediation Model, and U.S. Old-Age Policy, 1934–1950.” American Journal of Sociology 98: 308–339.Google Scholar
Anastasopoulos, Lefteris. 2016. “Estimating the Gender Penalty in House of Representative Elections Using a Regression Discontinuity Design.” Electoral Studies 43: 150–157.Google Scholar
Andersen, Vibeke Normann, and Hansen, Kasper M.. 2007. “How Deliberation Makes Better Citizens: The Danish Deliberative Poll on the Euro.” European Journal of Political Research 46: 531–556.Google Scholar
Anderson, Christopher J., Blais, André, Bowler, Shaun, Donovan, Todd, and Listhaug, Ola. 2005. Losers’ Consent: Elections and Democratic Legitimacy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Andersson, Staffan, Bergman, Torbjörn, and Ersson, Svante. 2014. “The European Representative Democracy Data Archive, Release 3.”Google Scholar
Ansell, Ben W. 2010. From the Ballot to the Blackboard: The Redistributive Political Economy of Education. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arnesen, Sveinung and Peters, Yvette. 2018. “The Legitimacy of Representation.” Comparative Political Studies 51(7): 868–899.Google Scholar
Arnold, Christine, and Franklin, Mark N.. 2012. “Introduction: Issue Congruence and Political Responsiveness.” West European Politics 35(6): 1217–1225.Google Scholar
Arzheimer, Kai, and Berning, Carl C.. 2019. “How the Alternative for Germany (AfD) and Their Voters Veered to the Radical Right, 2013–2017.” Electoral Studies 60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.electstud.2019.04.004CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arzheimer, Kai. 2015. “The AfD: Finally a Successful Right-Wing Populist Eurosceptic Party for Germany?” West European Politics 38(3):535–556.Google Scholar
Astor, Maggie. 2019. “‘It Can’t Be Worse’: How Republican Women Are Trying to Rebuild.” The New York Times. www.nytimes.com/2019/07/09/us/politics/republican-women-congress.html.Google Scholar
Atkeson, Lonna Rae. 2003. “Not All Cues Are Created Equal: The Conditional Impact of Female Candidates on Political Engagement.” Journal of Politics 65(4):1040–1061.Google Scholar
Audickas, Lukas. 2016. “Social Background of MPs 1979–2015.” House of Commons Library Briefing Paper No. CBP 7483.Google Scholar
Austen-Smith, D. 1990. “Information Transmission in Debate.” American Journal of Political Science 34(1): 124–152.Google Scholar
Bachrach, Peter, and Baratz, Morton S.. 1963. “Decisions and Nondecisions: An Analytical Framework.” American Political Science Review 57(3): 632–642.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bächtiger, André, and Gerber, Marléne. 2014. “Gentlemanly Conversation or Vigorous Contestation?: An Exploratory Analysis of Communication Modes in a Transnational Deliberative Poll (Europolis).” In Deliberative Mini-publics. Involving Citizens in the Democratic Process, eds. Grönlund, K., Bächtiger, A., and Setälä, M.. Colchester: ECPR Press, 115–134.Google Scholar
Bächtiger, André, and Goldberg, Saskia. 2020. “Towards a More Robust, but Limited and Contingent Defense of the Political Uses of Deliberative Minipublics.” Journal of Deliberative Democracy 16(2): 33–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bächtiger, Andre, and Parkinson, John. 2019. Mapping and Measuring Deliberation: Toward a New Deliberative Quality. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Bächtiger, Andre, Dryzek, John, Mansbridge, Jane, and Warren, Mark E., eds. 2018. The Oxford Handbook of Deliberative Democracy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Bäck, Hanna, and Carroll, Royce. 2018. Polarization and gridlock in parliamentary regimes. The Legislative Scholar 3: 1–6.Google Scholar
Badas, Alex, and Stauffer, Katelyn E.. 2019. “Voting for Women in Nonpartisan and Partisan Elections.” Electoral Studies 57: 245–255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barber, Benjamin. 1984. Strong Democracy: Participatory Politics for a New Age. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Barnes, Tiffany D., and Saxton, Gregory W.. 2019. “Working-Class Legislators and Perceptions of Representation in Latin America.” Political Research Quarterly 72(4): 910–928.Google Scholar
Barnes, Tiffany D., and Burchard, Stephanie M.. 2013. “‘Engendering’ Politics: The Impact of Descriptive Representation on Women’s Political Engagement in Sub-Saharan Africa.” Comparative Political Studies 46(7): 767–790.Google Scholar
Baron, David P., and Ferejohn, John A.. 1989. “Bargaining in Legislatures.” American Political Science Review 83(4): 1181–1206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bartels, Larry M. 2008. Unequal Democracy. The Political Economy of the New Gilded Age. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Bartels, Larry M. 2014. “U.S. Is a World Leader in Class Conflict over GovernmentS.” Washington Post. www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey–cage/wp/2014/04/21/u–s– is–a–world–leader–in–class–conflict–over–government–spending/.Google Scholar
Bartels, Larry M. 2016. Unequal Democracy: The Political Economy of the New Gilded Age. Princeton: Princeton University Press. https://doi.org/10.1515/9781400883363.Google Scholar
Bashir, Omar S. 2015. “Testing Inferences about American Politics: A Review of the ‘Oligarchy’ Result.” Research and Politics 2(4): 1–7.Google Scholar
Bawn, Kathleen, Cohen, Martin, Karol, David, Masket, Seth, Noel, Hans, and Zaller, John. 2012. “A Theory of Political Parties: Groups, Policy Demands and Nominations in American Politics.” Perspectives on Politics 10: 571–597.Google Scholar
Beauvais, Edana, and Warren, Mark E.. 2019. “What Can Deliberative Mini-Publics Contribute to Democratic Systems?” European Journal of Political Research 58(3): 893–914.Google Scholar
Bell, Daniel. 2015. The China Model: Political Meritocracy and the Limits of Democracy. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Bentley, Arthur F. 2008 [1908]. The Process of Government. New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers.Google Scholar
Beramendi, Pablo, Kitschelt, Herbert, Häusermann, Silja, and Kriesi, Hanspeter. 2015. “Introduction: The Politics of Advanced Capitalism.” In The Politics of Advanced Capitalism, eds. Beramendi, P., Häusermann, S., Kitschelt, H., Herbert, and Kriesi, H.. Cambridge, New York: Cambridge University Press, 1–64.Google Scholar
Beramendi, Pablo. 2012. The Political Geography of Inequality: Regions and Redistribution. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Berbuir, Nicole, Lewandowsky, Marcel, and Siri, Jasmin. 2015. “The AfD and Its Sympathisers: Finally a Right-Wing Populist Movement in Germany?” German Politics 24(2): 154–178.Google Scholar
Bergmann, Henning, Bäck, Hanna, and Saalfeld, Thomas. 2022. “Party-System Polarisation, Legislative Institutions and Cabinet Survival in 28 Parliamentary Democracies, 1945–2019.” West European Politics 45(3): 612–637.Google Scholar
Bernauer, Julian, Giger, Nathalie, and Rosset, Jan. 2015. “Mind the Gap: Do Proportional Electoral Systems Foster a More Equal Representation of Women and Men, Poor and Rich?” International Political Science Review 36(1): 78–98.Google Scholar
Bernhardt, Dan, Krasa, Stefan, and Polborn, Mattias. 2008. “Political Polarization and the Electoral Effects of Media Bias.” Journal of Public Economics 92(5–6): 1092–1104.Google Scholar
Bernstein, Basil B. 1971. Class, Codes and Control: Applied Studies towards a Sociology of Language. London: Routledge and K. Paul.Google Scholar
Bessette, Joseph M. 1980. “Deliberative Democracy: The Majority Principle in Republican Government.” In How Democratic Is the Constitution? eds. Goldwin, R. A. and Schambra, W. A.. Washington DC: American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research, 102–116.Google Scholar
Bessette, J. M. 1997. The Mild Voice of Reason: Deliberative Democracy and American National Government. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Best, Heinrich, and Cotta, Maurizio, eds. 2000. Parliamentary Representatives in Europe 1848–2000. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Best, Heinrich. 2007. “New Challenges, New Elites? Changes in the Recruitment and Career Patterns of European Representative Elites.” Comparative Sociology 6(1): 85–113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beste, Simon, and Wyss, Dominik. 2014. “Cognitive Complexity as a Proxy for High-Quality Deliberation? A Theoretical and Empirical Exploration of Cognitive Complexity and Deliberative Quality in the EuroPolis Discussions.” In ECPR General Conference September 3–6. Glasgow.Google Scholar
Betz, Hans-Georg. 1994. Radical Right-Wing Populism in Western Europe. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bhatti, Yosef and Erikson, Robert S.. 2011. “How Poorly Are the Poor Represented in the US Senate?” In Who Gets Represented? eds. Enns, Peter K. and Wlezien, Christopher. New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 223–246.Google Scholar
Bickerton, Christopher, and Accetti, Carlo Invernizzi. 2017. “Populism and Technocracy: Opposites or Complements?” Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy 20(2): 186–206.Google Scholar
Binder, Sarah A. 1999. “The Dynamics of Legislative Gridlock, 1947–96.” American Political Science Review 93(3): 519–533.Google Scholar
Binder, Sarah A. 2017. “Polarized We Govern?” In Governing in a Polarized Age: Elections, Parties and Political Representation in America, eds. Gerber, Alan S., Schickler, Eric, and Mayhew, David R.. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 223–242.Google Scholar
Binnema, Harmen, and Michels, Ank. 2021. “Does Democratic Innovation Reduce Bias? The G1000 as a New Form of Local Citizen Participation.” International Journal of Public Administration 45(6): 475–485.Google Scholar
Bird, Karen. 2014. “Ethnic Quotas and Ethnic Representation Worldwide.” International Political Science Review 35(1): 12–26.Google Scholar
Black, Merle. 1978. “Racial Composition of Congressional Districts and Support for Federal Voting Rights in the American South.” Social Science Quarterly 59: 435–450.Google Scholar
Bohman, James. 2010. Democracy across Borders: From Dêmos to Dêmoi. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Boix, Carles. 1998. Political Parties, Growth and Equality: Conservative and Social Democratic Economic Strategies in the World Economy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Böker, Marit. 2017. “Justification, Critique and Deliberative Legitimacy.” Contemporary Political Theory 16(1): 19–40.Google Scholar
Bølstad, J. 2015. “Dynamics of European Integration: Public Opinion in the Core and Periphery.” European Union Politics 16(1): 23–44.Google Scholar
Bonoli, Giuliano. 2013. The Origins of Active Social Policy: Labour Market and Childcare Policies in a Comparative Perspective. Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Bornschier, Simon. 2015. “The New Cultural Conflict, Polarization, and Representation in the Swiss Party System, 1975–2011.” Swiss Political Science Review 21(4): 680–701.Google Scholar
Börzel, Tanja, and Zürn, Michael. 2020. “Contestations of the Liberal Script (SCRIPTS). A Research Program.” SCRIPTS Working Paper (1).Google Scholar
Bovens, Mark A. P., and Wille, Anchrit. 2017. Diploma democracy: The Rise of Political Meritocracy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Box-Steffensmeier, Janet M., De Boef, Suzanna, and Lin, Tse-Min. 2004. “The Dynamics of the Partisan Gender Gap.” American Political Science Review 98(3): 515–528.Google Scholar
Branham, J. Alexander, Soroka, Stuart N., and Wlezien, Christopher. 2017. “When Do the Rich Win?” Political Science Quarterly 132(1): 43–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bratton, Kathleen A., and Ray, Leonard P. 2002. “Descriptive representation, policy outcomes, and municipal day-care coverage in Norway.” American Journal of Political Science, 46(2): 428–437.Google Scholar
Breux, Sandra, Couture, Jérôme, and Koop, Royce. 2019. “Influences on the Number and Gender of Candidates in Canadian Local Elections.” Canadian Journal of Political Science 52(1): 163–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brody, Richard A. 1991. Assessing the President. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Broockman, David E., Carnes, Nicholas, Crowder-Meyer, Melody, and Skovron, Christopher. 2021. “Why Local Party Leaders Don’t Support Nominating Centrists.” British Journal of Political Science 51(2): 724–749.Google Scholar
Brooks, Clem, and Manza, Jeff. 2007. Why Welfare States Persist: The Importance of Public Opinion in Democracies. Chicago: University of Chicago.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brooks, Clem, Nieuwbeerta, Paul and Manza, Jeff. 2006. “Cleavage-Based Voting Behavior in Cross-National Perspective: Evidence from Six Postwar Democracies.” Social Science Research 35(1): 88–128.Google Scholar
Brown, Mark B. 2006. “Survey Article: Citizen’s Panels and the Concept of Representation”. The Journal of Political Philosophy 14(2): 203–225.Google Scholar
Broz, Lawrence J., Frieden, Jeffrey, and Weymouth, Stephen. 2021. “Populism in Place: The Economic Geography of the Globalization Backlash.” International Organization 75(2): 464–494.Google Scholar
Brundidge, Jennifer, Kelly Garrett, R., Hernando, Rojas, and Gil de Zúñiga, Homero. 2014. “Political Participation and Ideological News Online: ‘Differential Gains’ and ‘Differential Losses’ in a Presidential Election Cycle.” Mass Communication and Society 17(4): 464–486.Google Scholar
Brunner, Eric, Ross, Stephen L., and Washington, Ebonya. 2013. “Does Less Income Mean Less Representation?” American Economic Journal: Economic Policy 5(2): 53–76.Google Scholar
Bucchianeri, Peter. 2018. “Is Running Enough? Reconsidering the Conventional Wisdom about Women Candidates.” Political Behavior 40(2): 435–466.Google Scholar
Budge, Ian. 2015. “Issue Emphases, Saliency Theory and Issue Ownership: A Historical and Conceptual Analysis.” West European Politics 38(4): 761–777.Google Scholar
Bullock III, Charles S. 1981. Congressional Voting and the Mobilization of a Black Electorate in the South. The Journal of Politics, 43(3): 662–682.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burden, Barry C., Ono, Yoshikuni, and Yamada, Masahiro. 2017. “Reassessing Public Support for a Female President.” The Journal of Politics 79(3):1073–1078.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burgoon, Brian, Noort, Sam, Rooduijn, Matthijs, and Underhill, Geoffrey. 2019. “Positional Deprivation and Support for Radical Right and Radical Left Parties.” Economic Policy 34(97): 49–93.Google Scholar
Busemeyer, Marius R., Goerres, Achim, and Weschle, Simon. 2009. “Attitudes towards Redistributive Spending in an Era of Demographic Ageing: The Rival Pressures from Age and Income in 14 OECD Countries.” Journal of European Social Policy 19(3): 195–212.Google Scholar
Busemeyer, Marius R., Garritzmann, Julian L., and Neimanns, Erik. 2020. A Loud, but Noisy Signal? Public Opinion and Education Reform in Western Europe. Cambridge, New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Busemeyer, Marius R., Garritzmann, Julian L., Neimanns, Erik, and Nezi, Roula. 2018. “Investing in Education in Europe: Evidence from a Survey of Public Opinion in Eight European Countries.” Journal of European Social Policy 28(1): 34–54.Google Scholar
Busemeyer, Marius R., Rathgeb, Philip, and Sahm, Alexander H. J.. 2022. “Authoritarian Values and the Welfare State: The Social Policy Preferences of Radical Right Voters.” West European Politics, 45(1): 77–101. DOI: 10.1080/01402382.2021.1886497.Google Scholar
Busemeyer, Marius R. 2012. “Inequality and the Political Economy of Education: An Analysis of Individual Preferences in OECD Countries.” Journal of European Social Policy 22(3): 219–240.Google Scholar
Busemeyer, Marius R. 2013. “Education Funding and Individual Preferences for Redistribution.” European Sociological Review 29(4): 707–719.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Busemeyer, Marius R. 2015. Skills and Inequality: The Political Economy of Education and Training Reforms in Western Welfare States. Cambridge, New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Butler, Daniel M. 2014. Representing the Advantaged. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Cain, Bruce, Dalton, Russell, and Scarrow, Susan. 2003. Democracy Transformed: Expanding Political Opportunities in Advanced Industrial Democracies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Campbell, David E., and Wolbrecht, Christina. 2006. “See Jane Run: Women Politicians as Role Models for Adolescents.” Journal of Politics 68(2): 233–247.Google Scholar
Campbell, Rosie, and Cowley, Philip. 2014. “What Voters Want: Reactions to Candidate Characteristics in a Survey Experiment.” Political Studies 62(4): 745–765.Google Scholar
Campbell, Rosie, and Erzeel, Silvia. 2018. “Exploring Gender Differences in Support for Rightist Parties: The Role of Party and Gender Ideology.” Politics and Gender 14(1): 80–105.Google Scholar
Campbell, Rosie, Childs, Sarah, and Lovenduski, Joni. 2010. “Do Women Need Women Representatives?” British Journal of Political Science 40(1): 171–194.Google Scholar
Canovan, Margaret. 1982. “Two Strategies for the Study of Populism.” Political Studies 30(4): 544–552.Google Scholar
Canovan, Margaret. 1999. “Trust the People! Populism and the Two Faces of Democracy.” Political Studies 47(1): 2–16.Google Scholar
Cantillon, Bea. 2011. “The Paradox of the Social Investment State: Growth, Employment and Poverty in the Lisbon Era.” Journal of European Social Policy 21(5): 432–449.Google Scholar
Caramani, Daniele. 2017. “Will vs. Reason: The Populist and Technocratic Forms of Political Representation and Their Critique to Party Government.” American Political Science Review 111(1): 54–67.Google Scholar
Carey, John, and Shugart, Matthew Soberg. 1995. “Incentives to Cultivate a Personal Vote.” Electoral Studies 14(4): 417–439.Google Scholar
Carnes, Nicholas, and Hansen, Eric. 2016. “Does Paying Politicians More Promote Economic Diversity in Legislatures?” American Political Science Review 110(4): 699–716.Google Scholar
Carnes, Nicholas, and Lupu, Noam. 2015. “Rethinking the Comparative Perspective on Class and Representation.” American Journal of Political Science 59(1): 1–18.Google Scholar
Carnes, Nicholas, and Lupu, Noam. 2016a. “Do Voters Dislike Working-Class Candidates?” American Political Science Review 110(4): 832–844.Google Scholar
Carnes, Nicholas, and Lupu, Noam. 2016b. “What Good Is a College Degree? Education and Leader Quality Reconsidered,” Journal of Politics 78(1): 35–49.Google Scholar
Carnes, Nicholas, and Arnold, R. Douglas. 2012. “Holding Mayors Accountable: New York’s Executives from Koch to Bloomberg.” American Journal of Political Science 56(4): 949–963.Google Scholar
Carnes, Nicholas. 2012. Does the Numerical Underrepresentation of the Working Class in Congress Matter? Legislative Studies Quarterly 37: 5–34.Google Scholar
Carnes, Nicholas. 2013. White-Collar Government: The Hidden Role of Class in Economic Policy Making. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carnes, Nicholas. 2018. The Cash Ceiling: Why Only the Rich Run for Office – And What We Can Do about It. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Carroll, Susan J., and Sanbonmatsu, Kira. 2013. More Women Can Run: Gender and Pathways to the State Legislatures. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Carroll, Susan J., ed. 2001. The Impact of Women in Public Office. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
Casillas, Christopher J., Enns, Peter K. and Wohlfarth, Patrick C.. 2011. “How Public Opinion Constrains the U.S. Supreme Court.” American Journal of Political Science 55(1): 74–88.Google Scholar
Cattaneo, M. Alejandra, and Wolter, Stefan C.. 2009. “Are the Elderly a Threat to Educational Expenditures?” European Journal of Political Economy 25(2): 225–236.Google Scholar
Caul, Miki. 2001. “Political Parties and the Adoption of Candidate Gender Quotas: A Cross-National Analysis.” Journal of Politics 63(4): 1214–1229.Google Scholar
Celis, Karen, and Childs, Sarah. 2011. “The Substantive Representation of Women: What to Do with Conservative Claims?” Political Studies 60(1): 213–255.Google Scholar
Chiba, Daina, Martin, Lanny W., and Stevenson, Randolph T.. 2015. “A Copula Approach to the Problem of Selection Bias in Models of Government Survival.” Political Analysis 23(1): 42–58.Google Scholar
Childs, Sarah. 2004. New Labour’s Women MPs: Women Representing Women. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Chwalisz, Claudia. 2020. “Reimagining democratic institutions: Why and how to embed public deliberation”. In Innovative Citizen Participation and New Democratic Institutions: Catching the Deliberative Wave. Paris: OECD Publishing.Google Scholar
Citrin, Jack and Green, Donald Philip. 1990. The Self-Interest Motive in American Public Opinion. In Research in Micropolitics, Volume 3, ed. Long, Samuel. Greenwich: JAI Press, 1–28.Google Scholar
Citrin, Jack. 2009. “Proposition 13 and the Transformation of California Government.” California Journal of Politics and Policy 1(1): 1–9.Google Scholar
Clayton, Amanda, Josefsson, Cecilia, and Wang, Vibeke. 2017. “Quotas and Women’s Substantive Representation: Evidence from a Content Analysis of Ugandan Plenary Debates.” Politics and Gender 13(2): 276–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cohen, Jeffrey E., and King, James D.. 2004. “Relative Unemployment and Gubernatorial Popularity.” Journal of Politics 66(4): 1267–1282.Google Scholar
Cook, Fay Lomax, Delli Carpini, Michael X., and Jacobs, Lawrence R.. 2007. Who Deliberates? Discursive Participation in America. In Deliberation, Participation and Democracy, ed. Rosenberg, Shawn W.. London: Palgrave Macmillan, 25–44.Google Scholar
Cooperman, Rosalyn, and Crowder-Meyer, Melody. 2018. “A Run for Their Money: Republican Women’s Hard Road to Campaign Funding.” In The Right Women: Republican Party Activists, Candidates, and Legislators, eds. Shames, Shauna L. and Och, Malliga. Denver: Praeger, 107–130.Google Scholar
Corbett, Richard, Jacobs, Francis and Schackleton, Michael. 2011. The European Parliament, 8th edition, London: John Harper Publishing.Google Scholar
Council of the European Union (2002). Council Decision of 25 June and 23 September 2002 Amending the Act Concerning the Election of the Representatives of the European Parliament by Direct Universal Suffrage, annexed to Decision 76/787/ECSC, EEC, Euratom (2002/772/EC, Euratom).Google Scholar
Council of the European Union (2018). Council Decision (EU, Euratom) 2018/994 of 13 July 2018 Amending the Act Concerning the Election of the Members of the European Parliament by Direct Universal Suffrage, annexed to Council Decision 76/787/ECSC, EEC, Euratom of 20 September 1976.Google Scholar
Cotta, Maurizio, and Best, Heinrich. 2007. “Parliamentary Representatives from Early Democratization to the Age of Consolidated Democracy: National Variations and International Convergence in a Long-Term Perspective.” In Democratic Representation in Europe: Diversity, Change, and Convergence, eds. Cotta, Maurizio and Best, Heinrich. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1–26.Google Scholar
Crafts, Nicholas, and Mills, Terence C.. 2020. “Is the UK Productivity Slowdown Unprecedented?” National Institute Economic Review 251:47–53.Google Scholar
Cramer, Katherine J. 2016. The Politics of Resentment: Rural Consciousness in Wisconsin and the Rise of Scott Walker. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Crosby, Ned, and Nethercut, Dough. 2005. “Citizen Juries: Creating a Trustworthy Voice of the People.” In The Deliberative Democracy Handbook, eds. Gastil, John and Levine, Peter. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 111–119.Google Scholar
Crowder-Meyer, Melody, and Smith, Adrienne R.. 2015. “How the Strategic Context Affects Women’s Emergence and Success in Local Legislative Elections.” Politics, Groups, and Identities 3(2): 295–317.Google Scholar
Crowder-Meyer, Melody, and Lauderdale, Benjamin E.. 2014. “A Partisan Gap in the Supply of Female Potential Candidates in the United States.” Research and Politics 1(1): 1–7.Google Scholar
Crowder-Meyer, Melody, and Cooperman, Rosalyn. 2018. “Can’t Buy Them Love: How Party Culture among Donors Contributes to the Party Gap in Women’s Representation.” Journal of Politics 80(4): 1211–1224.Google Scholar
Crowder-Meyer, Melody, Gadarian, Shana Kushner, and Trounstine, Jessica. 2020. “Voting Can Be Hard, Information Helps.” Urban Affairs Review 56(1): 124–153.Google Scholar
Crowder-Meyer, Melody. 2013. “Gendered Recruitment without Trying: How Local Party Recruiters Affect Women’s Representation.” Politics and Gender 9(4): 390–413.Google Scholar
Crowder-Meyer, Melody. 2020. “Baker, Bus Driver, Babysitter, Candidate? Revealing the Gendered Development of Political Ambition among Ordinary Americans.” Political Behavior 42: 359–384.Google Scholar
Crozier, Michael, Huntington, Samuel, and Watanuki, Joji. 1975. The Crisis of Democracy. New York: New York University Press.Google Scholar
Crum, Ben, and Fossum, John E.. 2009. “The Multilevel Parliamentary Field: A Framework for Theorizing Representative Democracy in the EU.” European Political Science Review 1(2): 249–271.Google Scholar
Curato, N., Vrydagh, J., and Bächtiger, A.. 2020. “Democracy without Shortcuts: Introduction to the Special Issue.” Journal of Deliberative Democracy, 16(2): 1–9. https://doi.org/10.16997/jdd.413.Google Scholar
Dahl, Robert A. 1961. Who Governs? Democracy and Power in an American City. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Dahl, Robert A. 1989. Democracy and its critics. New Haven, London: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Dahlberg, Stefan, Linde, Jonas, and Holmberg, Sören. 2014. “Democratic Discontent in Old and New Democracies: Assessing the Importance of Democratic Input and Governmental Output.” Political Studies 63(S1): 18–37.Google Scholar
Dal Bó, Ernesto, Finan, Frederico, Folke, Olle, Persson, Torsten, and Rickne, Johanna. 2017. “Who Becomes a Politician?” Quarterly Journal of Economics 132(4): 1877–1914.Google Scholar
Dalton, Russell J., Bürklin, Wilhelm, and Drummond, Andrew. 2001. “Public Opinion and Direct Democracy.” Journal of Democracy 12(4): 141–153.Google Scholar
Dalton, Russell J. 1999. Political Support in Advanced Industrial Democracies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Dalton, Russell J. 2013. Citizen Politics: Public Opinion and Political Parties in Advanced Industrial Democracies. Washington DC: Congressional Quarterly Press.Google Scholar
Damore, David F. 2004. The Dynamics of Issue Ownership in Presidential Campaigns. Political Research Quarterly 57: 391–397.Google Scholar
De Bruycker, Iskander. 2017. “Politicisation and the Public Interest: When Do the Elites in Brussels Address Public Interests in EU Policy Debates?” European Union Politics 18(4): 603–619.Google Scholar
De Ville, Ferdi, and Siles-Brügge, Gabriel. 2017. “Why TTIP Is a Game-Changer and its Critics Have a Point.” Journal of European Public Policy 24(10): 1491–1505.Google Scholar
De Vreese, Claes H., Banducci, Susan A., Semetko, Holli A., and Boomgaarden, Hajo G.. 2006. “The News Coverage of the 2004 European Parliamentary Election Campaign in 25 Countries.” European Union Politics 7(4): 477–504.Google Scholar
De Vries, Catherine E. 2018. Euroscepticism and the Future of European Integration. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
De Vries, Catherine E., and Hobolt, Sara B.. 2020. Political Entrepreneurs: The Rise of Challenger Parties in Europe. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
De Wilde, Pieter. 2013. “Representative Claims Analysis: Theory Meets Method.” Journal of European Public Policy 20(2): 278–294.Google Scholar
De Wilde, Pieter. 2019. The Quality of Representative Claims: Uncovering a Weakness in the Defense of the Liberal World Order. Political Studies 68(2): 271–292.Google Scholar
De Wilde, Pieter, Koopmans, Ruud, and Zürn, Michael. 2014. “The Political Sociology of Cosmopolitanism and Communitarianism: Representative Claims Analysis.” WZB Berlin Social Science Center.Google Scholar
Dean, Rikki, Rinne, Jonathan, and Geissel, Brigitte. 2019. “Systematizing Democratic Systems Approaches: Seven Conceptual Building Blocks.” Democratic Theory 6(2): 41–57.Google Scholar
Deitelhoff, Nicole, and Zimmermann, Lisbeth. 2019. “Norms under Challenge: Unpacking the Dynamics of Norm Robustness.” Journal of Global Security Studies 4(19): 2–17.Google Scholar
Della Porta, Donatella, and Tarrow, Sidney. 1986. “Unwanted Children: Political Violence and the Cycle of Protest in Italy, 1966–1973.” European Journal of Political Research 14(5–6): 607–632.Google Scholar
Delli Carpini, Michael X., and Keeter, Scott. 1997. What Americans Know about Politics and Why It Matters. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Diamond, Larry. 2020. “Breaking out of the Democratic Slump.” Journal of Democracy 31(1): 36–50.Google Scholar
Diermeier, Daniel, and van Roozendaal, Peter. 1998. “The Duration of Cabinet Formation Processes in Western Multi-Party Democracies.” British Journal of Political Science 28(4): 609–626.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Diermeier, Daniel, and Stevenson, Randolph T.. 1999. “Cabinet Survival and Competing Risks.” American Journal of Political Science 43(4): 1051–1068.Google Scholar
Diermeier, Daniel, and Stevenson, Randolph T.. 2000. “Cabinet Terminations and Critical Events.” The American Political Science Review 94(3): 627–640.Google Scholar
Diermeier, Daniel, Eraslan, Hulya, and Merlo, Antonio. 2003. “A Structural Model of Government Formation.” Econometrica 71(1): 27–70.Google Scholar
Disch, Lisa. 2011. “Toward a Mobilization Conception of Democratic Representation.” American Political Science Review 105(1): 100–114.Google Scholar
Disch, Lisa. 2015. The “Constructivist Turn” in Democratic Representation: A Normative Dead‐End? Constellations 22: 487–499.Google Scholar
Dittmar, Kelly. 2019. Unfinished Business: Women Running in 2018 and Beyond. New Brunswick, NJ: Center for American Women and Politics, Eagleton Institute of Politics.Google Scholar
Dittmar, Kelly. 2021. Measuring Success: Women in 2020 Legislative Elections. New Brunswick, NJ: Center for American Women and Politics, Eagleton Institute of Politics.Google Scholar
Dodd, Lawrence C. 1976. Coalitions in Parliamentary Government. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Doerr, Nicole. 2018. Political Translation: How Social Movement Democracies Survive. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Donnelly, Michael, and Lefkofridi, Zoe L.. 2014. “Economic and Political Inequality in Modern Democracies: Differential Responsiveness to the Policy Preferences of Economic Classes.” EUI Working Paper MWP Red Number Series 13/2014.Google Scholar
Döring, Holger, and Manow, Philip. 2016. Parliaments and Governments Database (ParlGov): Information on Parties, Elections and Cabinets in Modern Democracies. Development Version. Bremen.Google Scholar
Druckman, James N. and Jacobs, Lawrence R.. 2011. Segmented Representation: The Reagan White House and Disproportionate Responsiveness. In Who Gets Represented? Ed. Enns, Peter K. and Wlezien, Christopher. New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 166–188.Google Scholar
Dryzek, John S., and Tanasoca, Ana. 2021. Democratizing Global Justice: Deliberating Global Goals. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Dryzek, John S., and Stevenson, Hayley. 2011. “Global Democracy and Earth System Governance.” Ecological Economics 70(11): 1865–1874.Google Scholar
Dryzek, John S., and Niemeyer, Simon. 2008. “Discursive Representation.” American Political Science Review 102(4): 481–493.Google Scholar
Dryzek, John S., Bächtiger, André, Chambers, Simone, Cohen, Joshua, Druckman, James N., Felicetti, Andrea, Fishkin, James S., Farrell, David M., Fung, Archon, Gutmann, Amy, Landemore, Hélène, Mansbridge, Jane, Marien, Sofie, Neblo, Michael A., Niemeyer, Simon, Setälä, Maija, Slothuus, Rune, Suiter, Jane, Thompson, Dennis, and Warren, Mark E.. 2019. The Crisis of Democracy and the Science of Deliberation. Science 363(6432): 1144–1146.Google Scholar
Dryzek, John S. 2006. Deliberative Global Politics: Discourse and Democracy in a Divided World. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Dryzek, John. S. 2010. Foundations and Frontiers of Deliberative Governance. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Dryzek, John S. 2013. The Politics of the Earth: Environmental Discourses. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Dutwin, David. 2003. “The Character of Deliberation: Equality, Argument, and the Formation of Public Opinion.” International Journal of Public Opinion Research 15(3): 239–264.Google Scholar
Easton, David. 1965. A Framework for Political Analysis. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
Ecker, Alejandro, and Meyer, Thomas M.. 2015. “The Duration of Government Formation Processes in Europe.” Research and Politics 2(4): 1–9.Google Scholar
Ecker, Alejandro, and Meyer, Thomas M.. 2020. “Coalition Bargaining Duration in Multiparty Democracies.” British Journal of Political Science 50(1): 261–80.Google Scholar
Edelman. 2019. “Edelman Trust Barometer 2019.” www.edelman.co.uk/research/2019-trust-barometer.Google Scholar
Eichengreen, Barry. 2018. The Political Economy of European Monetary Unification. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Eijk, Cvd, and Franklin, M., eds. 1996. Choosing Europe? The European Electorate and National Politics in the Face of Union. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
Elder, Laurel, and Greene, Steven. 2012. The Politics of Parenthood. Albany: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
Ellis, Christopher R., Daniel Ura, Joseph and Robinson, Jenna Ashley. 2006. “The Dynamic Consequences of Nonvoting in American National Elections.” Political Research Quarterly 59(2): 227–233.Google Scholar
Ellis, Christopher. 2013. “Social Context and Economic Biases in Representation.” Journal of Politics 75(3): 773–786.Google Scholar
Ellis, Christopher. 2017. Putting Inequality in Context. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
Elsässer, Lea, Hense, Svenja, and Schäfer, Armin. 2017. “‘Dem Deutschen Volke?’ Die ungleiche Responsivität des Bundestags.” Zeitschrift für Politikwissenschaft 27(2): 161–180.Google Scholar
Elsässer, Lea, Hense, Svenja, and Schäfer, Armin 2018. “Government of the People, by the Elite, for the Rich: Unequal Responsiveness in an Unlikely Case.” MPlfG Discussion Paper.Google Scholar
Elsässer, Lea, Hense, Svenja, and Schäfer, Armin. 2021. Not Just Money. Unequal Responsiveness in Egalitarian Democracies. Journal of European Public Policy 28(12): 1890–1908.Google Scholar
Elstub, Stephen, and Escobar, Oliver. 2019. The Handbook of Democratic Innovation and Governance. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.Google Scholar
el-Wakil, Alice. 2017. “The Deliberative Potential of Facultative Referendums: Procedure and Substance in Direct Democracy.” Democratic Theory 4(1): 59–78.Google Scholar
Engler, Sarah, and Weisstanner, David. 2020. “The Threat of Social Decline: Income Inequality and Radical Right Support.” Journal of European Public Policy 6(2): 1–21.Google Scholar
Enns, Peter K. and Wlezien, Christopher. 2011. Group Opinion and the Study of Representation. In Who Gets Represented? ed. Enns, Peter K. and Wlezien, Christopher. New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 1–25.Google Scholar
Enns, Peter K. and Wohlfarth, Patrick C.. 2018. Making Sense of the Supreme Court-Public Opinion Relationship. In Routledge Handbook of Judicial Behavior, ed. Howard, Robert M. and Randazzo, Kirk. New York: Routledge Press, 180–195.Google Scholar
Enns, Peter K., Kelly, Nathan J., Morgan, Jana, Volscho, Thomas, and Witko, Christopher. 2014. “Conditional Status Quo Bias and Top Income Shares: How U.S. Political Institutions Have Benefited the Rich.” Journal of Politics 76(2): 289–303.Google Scholar
Enns, Peter K. 2014. “The Public’s Increasing Punitiveness and Its Influence on Mass Incarceration in the United States.” American Journal of Political Science 58(4): 857–872.Google Scholar
Enns, Peter K. 2015a. “Comment on: ‘Support for Redistribution in an Age of Rising Inequality: New Stylized Facts and Some Tentative Explanations.’” Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, 406–417.Google Scholar
Enns, Peter K. 2015b. “Reconsidering the Middle: A Reply to Martin Gilens.” Perspectives on Politics 13(4): 1072–1074.Google Scholar
Enns, Peter K. 2015c. “Relative Policy Support and Coincidental Representation.” Perspectives on Politics 13(4): 1053–1064.Google Scholar
Enns, Peter K. 2016. Incarceration Nation: How the United States Became the Most Punitive Democracy in the World. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Erikson, Robert S., MacKuen, Michael B., and Stimson, James A.. 2002. The Macro Polity. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Esping-Andersen, Gøsta. 1990. The Three Worlds of Welfare Capitalism. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Esping-Andersen, Gøsta. 2002. “A Child-Centred Social Investment Strategy.” In Why We Need a New Welfare State, ed. Esping-Andersen, G.. Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press, 26–67.Google Scholar
Espírito-Santo, Ana, Freire, André, and Serra-Silva, Sofia. 2018. “Does Women’s Descriptive Representation Matter for Policy Preferences? The Role of Political Parties.” Party Politics 26(2): 227–237.Google Scholar
ESS Round 6. 2012. European Social Survey Round 6 Data File Edition 2.4. NSD Norwegian Centre for Research Data.Google Scholar
Estévez-Abe, M., Iversen, T., D. and Soskice. 2001. “Social Protection and the Formation of Skills: A Reinterpretation of the Welfare State.” In Varieties of Capitalism: The Institutional Foundations of Comparative Advantage, eds. Hall, P. A. and Soskice, D.. Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press, 145–183.Google Scholar
Eulau, Heinz and Karps, Paul D.. 1977. “The Puzzle of Representation: Specifying Components of Responsiveness.” Legislative Studies Quarterly 2(3): 233–254.Google Scholar
European Parliament. 2015. “European Parliament Resolution of 8 July 2015 Containing the European Parliament’s Recommendations to the European Commission on the Negotiations for the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) (2014/2228(INI)).Google Scholar
Faricy, Christopher G. 2015. Welfare for the Wealthy. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Farrell, David M., and Suiter, Jane. 2019. Reimagining Democracy: Lessons in Deliberative Democracy from the Irish Front Line. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Farrell, David, and Scully, R.. 2010. “The European Parliament: One Parliament, Several Modes of Political Representation on the Ground?” Journal of European Public Policy 17: 36–54.Google Scholar
Farrell, David M., Suiter, Jane, and Harris, Clodagh. 2019. “‘Systematizing’ Constitutional Deliberation: The 2016–18 Citizens’ Assembly in Ireland.” Irish Political Studies 34(1): 113–123.Google Scholar
Farrell, David M., Suiter, Jane, Harris, Clodagh, and Cunningham, Kevin. 2020. The Effects of Mixed Membership in a Deliberative Forum: The Irish Constitutional Convention of 2012–2014. Political Studies 68(1): 54–73.Google Scholar
Fernandes, Jorge M., and Magalhães, Pedro C.. 2016. “Government Survival in Semi-Presidential Regimes.” European Journal of Political Research 55(1): 61–80.Google Scholar
Fernandez, Raquel, and Rogerson, Richard. 1995. “On the Political Economy of Education Subsidies.” Review of Economic Studies 62(2):249–262.Google Scholar
Ferrin, Monica, and Kriesi, Hanspeter. 2016. How Europeans View and Evaluate Democracy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Ferrin, Monica. (2012). What Is Democracy to Citizens? Understanding Perceptions and Evaluations of Democratic Systems in Contemporary Europe. Fiesole: European University Institute.Google Scholar
Fiorina, Morris P. 1974. Representatives, Roll Calls, and Constituencies. Lexington, MA: Heath.Google Scholar
Fishkin, James S., Luskin, Robert C., and Siu, Alice. 2014. “Europolis and the European Public Sphere: Empirical Explorations of a Counterfactual Ideal.” European Union Politics 15(3): 328–351.Google Scholar
Fishkin, James S. 2009. When the People Speak: Deliberative Democracy and Public Consultation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Fishkin, James S. 2018. Democracy When the People Are Thinking. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Flaherty, T., and Rogowski, R.. 2021. Rising Inequality As a Threat to the Liberal International Order. International Organization, 75(2): 495–523.Google Scholar
Flavin, Patrick and Franko, William W.. 2017. “Government’s Unequal Attentiveness to Citizens’ Political Priorities.” Policy Studies Journal 45(4): 659–687.Google Scholar
Flavin, Patrick. 2012. “Income Inequality and Policy Representation in the American States.” American Politics Research 40(1):29–59.Google Scholar
Flöthe, Linda and Rasmussen, Anne. 2019. “Public voices in the heavenly chorus? Group type bias and opinion representation.” Journal of European Public Policy 26(6): 824–842.Google Scholar
Føllesdal, Andreas, and Hix, Simon. 2006. “Why There Is a Democratic Deficit in the EU: A Response to Majone and Moravcsik.” Journal of Common Market Studies 44(3): 533–562.Google Scholar
Forst, Rainer. 2011. The Right to Justification. Elements of a Constructivist Theory of Justice. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Fournier, Patrick, van der Kolk, Henk, Carty, R. Kenneth, Blais, André, and Rose, Jonathan. 2011. When Citizens Decide: Lessons from Citizen Assemblies on Electoral Reform. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Franck, Raphaël, and Rainer, Ilia. 2012. “Does the Leader’s Ethnicity Matter?” American Political Science Review 106(2): 294–325.Google Scholar
Franklin, Mark N. 2014. “Why Vote at an Election with No Apparent Purpose? Voter Turnout at Elections to the European Parliament.” SIEPS – European Policy Analysis, April (4).Google Scholar
Franko, William W., and Witko, Christopher. 2018. The New Econoic Populism. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Freeden, Michael. 2003. Ideology: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Freeman, Jo. 1986. “The Political Culture of the Democratic and Republican Parties.” Political Science Quarterly 101(3): 327–356.Google Scholar
Freeman, Jo. 1987. “Whom You Know versus Whom You Represent: Feminist Influence in the Democratic and Republican Parties.” InThe Women’s Movements of the United States and Western Europe: Consciousness, Political Opportunity, and Public Policy, eds. Fainsod Katzenstein, M. and Mueller, C.. Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 215–244.Google Scholar
Frey, Carl Benedikt, and Osborne, Michael A.. 2017. “The Future of Employment: How Susceptible Are Jobs to Computerisation?” Technological Forecasting and Social Change 114 (January): 254–80.Google Scholar
Frid-Nielsen, S. S. 2018. “Human Rights or Security? Positions on Asylum in European Parliament Speeches.” European Union Politics, 19: 344–362.Google Scholar
Fukuyama, Francis. 2018. Identity: The Demand for Dignity and the Politics of Resentment. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.Google Scholar
Fung, Archon. 2003a. “Deliberative Democracy and International Labor Standards.” Governance 16(1): 51–71.Google Scholar
Fung, Archon. 2003b. “Recipes for Public Spheres: Eight Institutional Design Choices and Their Consequences.” Journal of Political Philosophy 11: 338–367.Google Scholar
Fung, Archon. 2006. “Varieties of Participation in Complex Governance.” Public Administration Review 66: 66–75.Google Scholar
Fung, Archon. 2013. “The Principle of Affected Interests: An Interpretation and Defense.” In Representation: Elections and beyond, ed. Nagel, J. and Smith, R.. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 236–268.Google Scholar
Galston, William A. 2018. “The Populist Challenge to Liberal-Democracy.” Journal of Democracy 29(2): 5–19.Google Scholar
Gambetta, Diego. 1998. “‘Claro!’: An Essay on Discursive Machismo.” Deliberative democracy, ed. Elster, J.. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 19–43.Google Scholar
Gamson, William A., and Meyer, David S.. 1996. Framing Political Opportunity. In Comparative Perspectives on Social Movements, ed. McAdam, Doug, McCarthy, John D., and Zald, Mayer N., Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 275–290.Google Scholar
Garritzmann, Julian, Busemeyer, Marius R., and Neimanns, Erik. 2018. “Public Demand for Social Investment: New Supporting Coalitions for Welfare State Reform in Western Europe?” Journal of European Public Policy 25(6): 844–861.Google Scholar
Garritzmann, Julian, Häusermann, Silja, Palier, Bruno, and Zollinger, Christine. 2017. “WOPSI: The World Politics of Social Investment.” LIEPP Working Paper 64.Google Scholar
Garritzmann, Julian L. 2016. The Political Economy of Higher Education Finance: The Politics of Tuition Fees and Subsidies in OECD Countries, 1945–2015. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Gastil, John, and Wright, Erik Olin. 2019. Legislatures by Lot: Transformative Designs for Deliberative Governance. London: Verso.Google Scholar
Gastil, John, and Knobloch, Katherine. 2020. Hope for Democracy: How Citizens Can Bring Reason Back into Politics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Gastil, John. 2008. Communication and Public Deliberation. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publishers.Google Scholar
Gattermann, Katjana, and Vasilopoulou, Sofia. 2015. “Absent yet Popular? Explaining News Visibility of Members of the European Parliament.” European Journal of Political Research 54: 121–140.Google Scholar
Gauland, Alexander. 2018. “Warum muss es Populismus sein?” Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, October 6.Google Scholar
Gaus, Daniel, Landwehr, Claudia, and Schmalz-Bruns, Rainer. 2020. Defending Democracy against Technocracy and Populism: Deliberative Democracy’s Strengths and Challenges, Constellations 27 (3): 335–347.Google Scholar
Gaus, Daniel 2013. “Rational Reconstruction as a Method of Political Theory between Social Critique and Empirical Political Science.” Constellations 20(4): 553–570.Google Scholar
Gerber, Marléne, Bächtiger, André, Fiket, Irena, Steenbergen, Marco, and Steiner, Jürg. 2014. “Deliberative and Non-Deliberative Persuasion: Mechanisms of Opinion Formation in EuroPolis.” European Union Politics 15(3): 410–429.Google Scholar
Gerber, Marléne, Bächtiger, André, Shikano, Susumu, Reber, Simon, and Rohr, Samuel. 2018. “Deliberative Abilities and Influence in a Transnational Deliberative Poll (EuroPolis).” British Journal of Political Science 48(4): 1093–1118.Google Scholar
Gerber, Marléne. 2015. “Equal Partners in Dialogue? Participation Equality in a Transnational Deliberative Poll (EuroPolis).” Political Studies 63(1): 110–130.Google Scholar
Gerring, John, Pemstein, Daniel, and Skaaning, Svend-Erik. 2018. “An Ordinal, Concept-Driven Approach to Measurement: The Lexical Scale.” Sociological Methods and Research (Online). https://doi.org/10.1177/0049124118782531.Google Scholar
Gerring, John. 2007. Case Study Research: Principles and Practice. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Gerring, John 2008. “Case Selection for Case-Study Analysis: Qualitative and Quantitative Techniques’.” In The Oxford Handbook of Political Methodology, eds. Box-Steffensmeier, J., Brady, H. E., and Collier, D.. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 645–684.Google Scholar
Gheyle, N. 2019. “Conceptualizing the Parliamentarization and Politicization of European Policies.” Politics and Governance 7: 227–236.Google Scholar
Giannetti, Daniela, Pedrazzani, Andrea, and Pinto, Luca. 2020. “Bicameralism and Government Formation: Does Bicameral Incongruence Affect Bargaining Delays?” European Political Science Review (Online). https://doi.org/10.1017/S1755773920000235.Google Scholar
Gidron, Noam, and Hall, Peter A.. 2017. “The Politics of Social Status: Economic and Cultural Roots of the Populist Right.” The British Journal of Sociology 68:57–84.Google Scholar
Gidron, Noam, and Hall, Peter A.. 2019. “Populism as a Problem of Social Integration.” Comparative Political Studies 53(7): 1027–1059.Google Scholar
Giger, Nathalie, Rosset, Jan, and Bernauer, Julian. 2012. “The Poor Political Representation of the Poor in a Comparative Perspective.” Representation 48(1): 47–61.Google Scholar
Gilardi, Fabrizio. 2015. “The Temporary Importance of Role Models for Women’s Political Representation.” American Journal of Political Science 59(4): 957–970.Google Scholar
Gilens, Martin and Page, Benjamin I.. 2014. “Testing Theories of American Politics: Elites, Interest Groups, and Average Citizens.” Perspectives Politics 12(3):564–581.Google Scholar
Gilens, Martin. 1999. Why Americans Hate Welfare. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Gilens, Martin. 2005. “Inequality and Democratic Responsiveness.” Public Opinion Quarterly 69(5): 778–796.Google Scholar
Gilens, Martin. 2009. “Preference Gaps and Inequality in Representation.” PS: Political Science and Politics 42(2):335–341.Google Scholar
Gilens, Martin. 2011. Policy Consequences of Representational Inequality. In Who Gets Represented? ed. Enns, Peter K. and Wlezien, Christopher. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
Gilens, Martin. 2012. Affluence and Influence: Economic Inequality and Political Power in America. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Gilens, Martin. 2015. “The Insufficiency of ‘Democracy by Coincidence’: A Response to Peter k. Enns.” Perspectives on Politics 13(04): 1065–1071.Google Scholar
Gilens, Martin. 2016. “Simulating Representation: The Devil’s in the Detail.” Research and Politics 3(2): 1–7.Google Scholar
Gillion, Daniel Q. 2012. Protest and Congressional Behavior: Assessing Racial and Ethnic Minority Protests in the District. Journal of Politics 74: 950–962.Google Scholar
Gillion, Daniel Q. 2013. The political power of protest. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Gillion, Daniel Q. 2020. The Loud Minority: Why Protests Matters in American Democracy. Princeton: Princeton University PressGoogle Scholar
Goldberg, Saskia. (2021). “Just Advisory and Maximally Representative: A Conjoint Experiment on Non-Participants’ Legitimacy Perceptions of Deliberative Forums.” Journal of Deliberative Democracy 17(1): 56–75.Google Scholar
Golder, Matt. 2003. “Explaining Variation in the Success of Extreme Right Parties in Western Europe.” Comparative Political Studies 36(4): 432–466.Google Scholar
Golder, Matt. 2016. “Far Right Parties in Europe.” Annual Review of Political Science 19(1): 477–497.Google Scholar
Golder, Sona N. 2010. “Bargaining Delays in the Government Formation Process.” Comparative Political Studies 43(1): 3–32.Google Scholar
Goodhart, David. 2017. The Road to Somewhere: The Populist Revolt and the Future of Politics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Goodin, Robert E., and Dryzek, John S.. 2006. “Deliberative Impacts: The Macro-Political Uptake of Mini-Publics.” Politics and Society 34(2): 219–244.Google Scholar
Gordon, Robert J. 2014a. The Demise of US Economic Growth: Restatement, Rebuttal, and Reflections. Technical report. National Bureau of Economic Research.Google Scholar
Gordon, Robert J. 2014b. “The Turtle’s Progress: Secular Stagnation Meets the Headwinds.” In Secular Stagnation: Facts, Causes and Cures, eds. Teulings, C. and Baldwin, R.. London: Centre for Economic Policy Research Press, 47–59.Google Scholar
Grant, Ruth W., and Keohane, Robert O.. 2005. “Accountability and Abuses of Power in World Politics.” American Political Science Review 99(1): 29–43.Google Scholar
Griffin, John D. and Newman, Brian. 2008. Minority Report: Evaluating Political Equality in America. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Griffin, John D., and Anewalt-Remsburg, Claudia. 2013. “Legislator Wealth and the Effort to Repeal the Estate Tax.” American Politics Research 41(4): 599–622.Google Scholar
Griffin, John D., Newman, Brian and Wolbrecht, Christina. 2012. “A Gender Gap in Policy Represesentation in the U.S. Congress?” Legislative Studies Quarterly 37(1): 35–66.Google Scholar
Gronke, Paul, and Newman, Brian. 2003. “FDR to Clinton, Mueller to? A Field Essay on Presidential Approval,” Political Research Quarterly 56(4): 501–512.Google Scholar
Grose, Christian, Malhotra, Neil, and Van Houweling, Robert P.. 2015. “Explaining Explanations: How Legislators Explain Their Policy Positions and How Citizens React.’” American Political Science Journal 59(3): 724–743.Google Scholar
Grose, Christian. 2013. “Risk and Roll Calls: How Legislators’ Personal Finances Shape Congressional Decisions.” SSRN Working Paper 2220524.Google Scholar
Grossmann, Matt, and Hopkins, David A.. 2016. Asymmetric Politics: Ideological Republicans and Group Interest Democrats. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen. 1992. Faktizität und Geltung: Beiträge zur Diskurstheorie des Rechts und des demokratischen Rechtsstaats. Berlin: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen. 1998. Die Postnationale Konstellation. Politische Essays. Berlin: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
Hacker, Jacob S. and Pierson, Paul. 2010. Winner-Take-All Politics. New York: Simon and Schuster.Google Scholar
Hacker, Jacob S., Rehm, Philipp and Schlesinger, Mark. 2013. “The Insecure American: Economic Experiences, Financial Worries, and Policy Attitudes.” Perspectives on Politics 11(1): 23–49.Google Scholar
Hagemann, Sara, Hobolt, Sara B., and Wratil, Christopher. 2017. “Government Responsiveness in the European Union: Evidence from Council Voting.” Comparative Political Studies, 50(6): 850–976.Google Scholar
Han, Kyung J. 2016. “Income Inequality and Voting for Radical Right-Wing Parties.” Electoral Studies 42: 54–64.Google Scholar
Hansen, Kasper M. 2010. “The Equality Paradox of Deliberative Democracy. Evidence from a National Deliberative Poll.” In Political Discussion in Modern Democracies: A Comparative Perspective, eds. Wolf, M., Morales, L., and Ikdeda, K.. London: Routledge, 26–43.Google Scholar
Hathaway, O. (2020). “Presidential Power over International Law.” In Foreign Policy Secrecy in the Age of Transparency, eds. Abazi, V. and Rosén, G.. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Häusermann, Silja, and Kriesi, Hanspeter. 2015. “What Do Voters Want? Dimensions and Configurations in Individual-Level Preferences and Party Choice.” In The Politics of Advanced Capitalism, eds. Beramendi, Pablo, Häusermann, Silja, Kitschelt, Herbert, and Kriesi, Hanspeter. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 202–230.Google Scholar
Häusermann, Silja, Kurer, Thomas, and Schwander, Hanna. 2015. “High-Skilled Outsiders? Labor Market Vulnerability, Education and Welfare State Preferences.” Socio-Economic Review 13(2): 235–258.Google Scholar
Hawkins, Kirk A., Rovira Kaltwasser, Cristóbal, and Andreadis, Ioannis. 2018. “The Activation of Populist Attitudes.” Government and Opposition 55(2): 283–307.Google Scholar
Heath, Oliver. 2018. “Policy Alienation, Social Alienation and Working-Class Abstention in Britain, 1964–2010.” British Journal of Political Science 48(4): 1053–1073.Google Scholar
Heckman, James J. 2006. “Skill Formation and the Economics of Investing in Disadvantaged Children.” Science 312: 1900–1902.Google Scholar
Heinelt, Hubert. 2018. Handbook on Participatory Governance. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.Google Scholar
Held, David. 1995. Democracy and the Global Order: From the Modern State to Cosmopolitical Governance. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Hemerijck, Anton, ed. 2017. The Uses of Social Investment. Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hemerijck, Anton. 2013. Changing Welfare States. Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hemerijck, Anton. 2018. “Social Investment as a Policy Paradigm.” Journal of European Public Policy 25(6): 810–827.Google Scholar
Hernandez, Jesus. 2009. “Redlining Revisited: Mortgage Lending Patterns in Sacramento 1930– 2004.” International Journal of Urban and Regional Research 33(2): 291–313.Google Scholar
Herzog, Jr., Harold, A. 1993. “‘The Movement Is My Life’: The Psychology of Animal Rights Activism.” Journal of Social Issues 49(1): 103–119.Google Scholar
Hetherington, Marc J., and Rudolph, Thomas J.. 2015. Why Washington Won’t Work: Polarization, Political Trust, and the Governing Crisis. Chicago: Chicago University Press.Google Scholar
Hibbing, John R., and Theiss-Morse, Elizabeth. 2002. Stealth Democracy. Americans’ Beliefs about How Government Should Work. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hickerson, Andrea, and Gastil, John. 2008. “Assessing the Difference Critique of Deliberation: Gender, Emotion, and the Jury Experience.” Communication Theory 18: 281–303.Google Scholar
Hillen, Sven, and Steiner, Nils D.. 2019. “Citizens with Economically Left-Wing and Culturally Right-Wing Views Vote Less and Are Less Satisfied with Politics.” Democratic Audit. www.democraticaudit.com/2019/11/15/citizens-with-economically-left-wing-and-culturally-right-wing-views-vote-less-and-are-less-satisfied-with-politics/.Google Scholar
Hillier, Amy E. 2003. “Spatial Analysis of Historical Redlining: A Methodological Exploration.” Journal of Housing Research 14(1): 137–167.Google Scholar
Hix, Simon. 2002. “Parliamentary Behavior with Two Principals: Preferences, Parties, and Voting in the European Parliament.” American Journal of Political Science 46(3): 668–698.Google Scholar
Hix, Simon, Noury, Abdul G., and Roland, Gérard. 2007. Democratic Politics in the European Parliament. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hix, Simon, Raunio, Tapio, and Scully., Roger 2003. “Fifty Years On: Research on the European Parliament, Journal of Common Market Studies, 41(2): 191–202.Google Scholar
Hobolt, Sara B. and Klemmensen, Robert. 2008. “Government Responsivenesss and Political Competition in Comparative Perspective,” Comparative Political Studies, 41(3): 309–337.Google Scholar
Hobolt, Sara B., and Tilley, James. 2014. Blaming Europe? Responsibility without Accountability in the European Union. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hobolt, Sara B. 2016. “The Brexit Vote. A Divided Nation, a Divided Continent.” Journal of European Public Policy 23(9): 1259–1277.Google Scholar
Hochschild, Arlie R. 2016. “The Ecstatic Edge of Politics: Sociology and Donald Trump.” Contemporary Sociology 45(6): 683–689.Google Scholar
Hochschild, Jennifer L. 1981. What’s Fair? American Beliefs about Distributive Justice. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Holman, Mirya R. 2014. Women in Politics in the American City. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.Google Scholar
Hooghe, Lisbeth, and Marks, Gary. 2009. “A Postfunctionalist Theory of European Integration: From Permissive Consensus to Constraining Dissensus.” British Journal of Political Science 39(1): 1–23.Google Scholar
Hooghe, Lisbeth, and Marks, Gary. 2017. “Cleavage Theory Meets Europe’s Crises: Lipset, Rokkan, and the Transnational Cleavage.” Journal of European Public Policy 25 (SI: Theory Meets Crisis): 109–135.Google Scholar
Hooghe, Liesbet, Marks, Gary, and Wilson, Carole J.. “Does Left/Right Structure Party Positions on European Integration?” Comparative Political Studies 35(8): 965–989.Google Scholar
Hooghe, Marc. 1999. “The Rebuke of Thersites. Deliberative Democracy under Conditions of Inequality.” Acta Politica 34(4): 287–301.Google Scholar
Hsieh, Chang-Tai, and Moretti, Enrico. 2019. “Housing Constraints and Spatial Misallocation.” American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics 11(2): 1–39.Google Scholar
Huber, Evelyne, and Stephens, John D.. 2014. “Income Inequality and Redistribution in Post-Industrial Democracies: Demographic, Economic and Political Determinants.” Socio-Economic Review 12(2): 245–267.Google Scholar
Huber, Evelyne, Gunderson, Jacob, and Stephens, John D.. 2020. “Private Education and Inequality in the Knowledge Economy.” Policy and Society 39(2): 171–188.Google Scholar
Huntington, Samuel P. 1993. The Third Wave: Democratization in the Late Twentieth Century. Norman, OK: University of Oklahoma Press.Google Scholar
Iakhnis, Evgeniia, Rathbun, Brian, Reifler, Jason, and Scotto, Thomas J.. 2018. “Populist Referendum: Was ‘Brexit’ an Expression of Nativist and Anti-Elitist Sentiment?” Research and Politics (Online). https://doi.org/10.1177/2053168018773964.Google Scholar
Ignazi, Piero. 1992. “The Silent Counter-Revolution. Hypotheses on the Emergence of Extreme Right-Wing Parties in Europe.” European Journal of Political Research 22(1): 3–34.Google Scholar
Ikenberry, G. John. 2020. A World Safe for Democracy. Liberal Internationalism and the Crisis of Global Order. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Inglehart, Ronald, and Norris, Pippa. 2017. “Trump and the Populist Authoritarian Parties: The Silent Revolution in Reverse.” Perspectives on Politics 15(2): 443–454.Google Scholar
Inglehart, Ronald. 1977. The Silent Revolution. Changing Values and Political Styles among Western Publics. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Inglehart, Ronald. 1990. Culture Shift in Advanced Industrial Society. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Inglehart, Ronald. 2003. “How Solid Is Mass Support for Democracy—and How Can We Measure It?” Political Science and Politics 36(1):51–57.Google Scholar
International Monetary Fund. Research Dept. 2019. “World Economic Outlook, October 2019: Global Manufacturing Downturn, Rising Trade Barriers.” In IMF chapter, Closer Together or Further Apart? Subnational Regional Disparities and Adjustment in Advanced Economies.Google Scholar
Parline, IPU, ed. 2020. “Percentage of Women in National Parliaments.” https://data.ipu.org/women-averages.Google Scholar
Isernia, Pierangelo, and Fishkin, James S.. 2014. “The EuroPolis Deliberative Poll.” European Union Politics 15(3): 311–327.Google Scholar
Ivarsflaten, Elisabeth. 2008. “What Unites Right-Wing Populists in Western Europe?” Comparative Political Studies 41(1): 3–23.Google Scholar
Iversen, Torben, and Soskice, David. 2019. Democracy and Prosperity: Reinventing Capitalism through a Turbulent Century. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Jacobs, Lawrence R., and Page, Benjamin I.. 2005. “Who Influences U.S. Foreign Policy?” American Political Science Review 99(1): 107–123.Google Scholar
Jacobs, Lawrence R. and Skocpol, Theda. 2005. American Democracy in an Era of Rising Inequality. In Inequality and American Democracy, ed. Jacobs, Lawrence R. and Skocpol, Theda. New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 1–18.Google Scholar
Jacquet, Vincent, and van der Does, Ramon. 2020. “The Consequences of Deliberative Minipublics: Systematic Overview, Conceptual Gaps, and New Directions.” Representation 57(1): 131–141.Google Scholar
Jahn, Detlef. 2006. “Globalization as ‘Galton’s Problem’: The Missing Link in the Analysis of Diffusion Patterns in Welfare State Development.” International Organization 60: 401–431.Google Scholar
Jakobi, Anja P. 2011. “Political Parties and the Institutionalization of Education: A Comparative Analysis of Party Manifestos.” Comparative Education Review 55(2): 189–209.Google Scholar
Kaiser Family Foundation. 2013. “2013 Survey of Americans on the U.S. Role in Global Health.” https://kaiserfamilyfoundation.files.wordpress.com/2013/11/8508-f-2013-survey-of-americans-on-the-u-s-role-in-global-health.pdf.Google Scholar
Kalbfleisch, John D., and Prentice, Ross L.. 2002. The Statistical Analysis of Failure Time Data. Hoboken: Wiley-Interscience.Google Scholar
Kaldor, Mary. 2003. “The Idea of Global Civil Society.” International Affairs 79(3): 583–593.Google Scholar
Karpowitz, Christopher F., Mendelberg, Tali, and Lee Shaker, L. 2012. Gender Inequality in Deliberative Participation. American Political Science Review 106(3): 533–547.Google Scholar
Katz, Richard S. 2001. ‘The Problem of Candidate Selection and Models of Party Democracy,” Party Politics 7(3): 277–296.Google Scholar
Kaufmann, Karen M. and Petrocik, John R.. 1999. “The Changing Politics of American Men: Under- standing the Sources of the Gender Gap.” American Journal of Political Science 43: 864–887.Google Scholar
Kelly, Nathan J. and Enns, Peter K.. 2010. “Inequality and the Dynamics of Public Opinion: The Self-Reinforcing Link Between Economic Inequality and Mass Preferences.” American Journal of Political Science 54(4): 855–870.Google Scholar
Keohane, Robert O., Macedo, Stephen, and Moravcsik, Andrew. 2009. “Democracy-Enhancing Multilateralism.” International Organization 63(1): 1–31.Google Scholar
Kinder, Donald R. and Sanders, Lynn M.. 1996. Divided by Color: Racial Politics and Democratic Ideals. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
King, Gary, Alt, James E., Burns, Nancy Elizabeth, and Laver, Michael. 1990. “A Unified Model of Cabinet Dissolution in Parliamentary Democracies.” American Journal of Political Science 34(3): 846–871.Google Scholar
Kingdon, John W. [1984] 2011. Agendas, Alternatives, and Public Policies. Boston: Little and Brown.Google Scholar
Kinski, L. 2018. “Whom to Represent? National Parliamentary Representation during the Eurozone Crisis.” Journal of European Public Policy 25(3): 346–368.Google Scholar
Kirkland, Patricia A. 2018. “The Business of Being Mayor: Mayors and Fiscal Policy in U.S. Cities.” Working paper.Google Scholar
Kitchens, Karin E., and Swers, Michele L.. 2016. “Why Aren’t There More Republican Women in Congress? Gender, Partisanship, and Fundraising Support in the 2010 and 2012 Elections.” Politics and Gender 12(4): 648–676.Google Scholar
Kitschelt, Herbert, and McGann, Anthony J.. 1997. The Radical Right in Western Europe: A Comparative Analysis. 1st ed. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
Kitschelt, Herbert, and Rehm, Philipp. 2014. “Occupations as a Site of Political Preference Formation.” Comparative Political Studies 47(12):1670–1706.Google Scholar
Klüver, Heike, and Spoon, Jae-Jae. 2015. “Bringing Salience Back in: Explaining Voting Defection in the European Parliament.” Party Politics 21(4): 553–564.Google Scholar
Kollman, Ken, Hicken, Allen, Caramani, Daniele, Backer, David, and Lublin, David. 2017. Constituency-Level Elections Archive. Ann Arbor: Center for Political Studies, University of Michigan.Google Scholar
König, Thomas, and Debus, Marc. 2010. Reform Processes and Policy Change: Veto Players and Decision-Making in Modern Democracies. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
Koo, Richard C. 2014. The Escape from Balance Sheet Recession and the QE Trap: A Hazardous Road for the World Economy. Hoboken: John Wiley and Sons.Google Scholar
Koopmans, R., and Zürn, M.. 2019. Cosmopolitanism and Communitarianism – How Globalization Is Reshaping Politics in the Twenty-First Century. In The Struggle Over Borders: Cosmopolitanism and Communitarianism, eds. De Wilde, P., Koopmans, R., Merkel, W., Strijbis, O., and Zürn, M.. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1–34.Google Scholar
Korpi, Walter, and Palme, Joakim. 1998. “The Paradox of Redistribution and Strategies of Equality: Welfare State Institutions, Inequality, and Poverty in the Western Countries.” American Sociological Review 63(5): 661–687.Google Scholar
Koster, Willem de, Achterberg, Peter, and Waal, Jeroen. 2013. “The New Right and the Welfare State: The Electoral Relevance of Welfare Chauvinism and Welfare Populism in the Netherlands.” International Political Science Review 34(1): 3–20.Google Scholar
Kraus, Michael W., and Callaghan, Bennett. 2014. “Noblesse Oblige? Social Status and Economic Inequality Maintenance among Politicians.” PLoS ONE 9(1): 1–6.Google Scholar
Kreitzer, Rebecca J., and Osborn, Tracy L.. 2019. “The Emergence and Activities of Women’s Recruiting Groups in the U.S.” Politics, Groups, and Identities 7(4): 842–852.Google Scholar
Kriesi, Hanspeter, Grande, Edgar, Dolezal, Martin, Helbling, Marc, Höglinger, Dominic, Hutter, Swen, and Wüest, Bruno. 2012. Political Conflict in Western Europe. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kriesi, Hanspeter, Grande, Edgar, Lachat, Romain, Dolezal, Martin, Bornschier, Simon, and Frey, Timotheos. 2008. West European Politics in the Age of Globalization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kriesi, Hanspeter, and Morlino, L. (2016). “Conclusion – What Have We Learnt, and Where Do We Go from Here?” In How Europeans View and Evaluate Democracy, eds. Kriesi, H. and Ferrin, M.. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 307–326.Google Scholar
Kriesi, Hanspeter. 2014. “The Populist Challenge.” West European Politics 37(2): 361–378.Google Scholar
Kriesi, Hanspeter. 2020. “Is There a Crisis of Democracy in Europe?” Politische Vierteljahresschrift 61: 237–260.Google Scholar
Kröger, Sandra, and Friedrich, Dawid. 2013. “Introduction: The Representative Turn in EU Studies.” Journal of European Public Policy 20(2): 155–170.Google Scholar
Krook, Mona Lena. 2009. Quotas for Women in Politics: Gender and Candidate Selection Reform Worldwide. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Krugman, Paul. 2014. “Four Observations on Secular Stagnation.” In Secular Stagnation: Facts, Causes, and Cures, eds. Teulings, C. and Baldwin, R.. London: Centre for Economic Policy Research Press, 61–68Google Scholar
Kunovitch, Sheri. 2018. “Occupational Diversity in Polish Politics, 1991–2011.” International Journal of Sociology 48(1): 60–75.Google Scholar
Ladam, Christina, Harden, Jeffrey J., and Windett, Jason H.. 2018. “Prominent Role Models: High-Profile Female Politicians and the Emergence of Women as Candidates for Public Office.” American Journal of Political Science 62(2): 369–381.Google Scholar
Lafont, Cristina. 2015. “Deliberation, Participation and Democratic Legitimacy: Should Deliberative Minipublics Shape Public Policy?” Journal of Political Philosophy 23(1): 40–63.Google Scholar
Lafont, Cristina. 2017. “Can Democracy Be Deliberative and Participatory? The Democratic Case for Political Uses of Mini-Publics.” Journal of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences 146(3): 85–105.Google Scholar
Lafont, Cristina . 2020a. Democracy without Shortcuts. A Participatory Conception of Deliberative Democracy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Lafont, Cristina. 2020b. “Against Anti-Democratic Shortcuts: A Few Replies to Critics.” Journal of Deliberative Democracy 16(2): 96–109.Google Scholar
Landemore, Hélène. 2020. Open Democracy: Reinventing Popular Rule for the 21st Century. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Landwehr, Claudia., and Steiner, Nils D.. 2017. “Where Democrats Disagree: Citizens’ Normative Conceptions of Democracy.” Political Studies 65(4): 786–804.Google Scholar
Landwehr, Claudia, and Faas, Thorsten. 2016. Who Wants Democratic Innovations, and Why. Mainz: Johannes Gutenberg-Universität.Google Scholar
Landwehr, Claudia. 2009. Political Conflict and Political Preferences: Communicative Interaction between Facts, Norms, and Interests. Colchester: ECPR Press.Google Scholar
Landwehr, Claudia. 2015. “Democratic Meta-Deliberation. Towards Reflective Institutional Design.” Political Studies 63(S1): 38–54.Google Scholar
Lang, Amy, and Warren, Mark E.. 2012. “Supplementary Democracy? Democratic Deficits and Citizens’ Assemblies.” In Imperfect Democracies, eds. Lenard, P. and Simeon, R.. Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press, 291–314.Google Scholar
Lau, Richard R. and Heldman, Caroline. 2009. “Self-Interest, Symbolic Attitudes, and Support for Public Policy.” Political Psychology 30(4): 513–537.Google Scholar
Laver, Michael, and Shepsle, Kenneth A.. 1996. Making and Breaking Governments: Cabinets and Legislatures in Parliamentary Democracies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Laver, Michael, and Schofield, Norman. 1990. Multiparty Government: The Politics of Coalition in Europe. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Laver, Michael, and Ben Hunt, W.. 1992. Policy and Party Competition. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Lawless, Jennifer, and Fox, Richard. 2010. It Still Takes a Candidate: Why Women Don’t Run for Office. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Lax, Jeffrey R., Phillips, Justin H. and Zelizer, Adam. 2019. “The Party or the Purse? Unequal Representation in the US Senate.” American Political Science Review 113(4): 917–940.Google Scholar
Lee, Caroline W. 2015. Do-It-Yourself Democracy: The Rise of the Public Engagement Industry. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Lee, Frances E., and McCarty, Nolan M., ed. 2019. Can America Govern Itself? New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Lee, Taeku. 2002. Mobilizing Public Opinion: Black Insurgency and Racial Attitudes in the Civil Rights Era. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Lefkofridi, Z., and Katsanidou, A.. 2014. “Multilevel Representation in the European Parliament.” European Union Politics 15(1): 108–131.Google Scholar
Lehmann, Pola, Regel, Sven, and Schlote, Sara. 2015. “Ungleichheit in der politischen Repräsentation.” In Demokratie und Krise: Zum schwierigen Verhältnis von Theorie und Empirie, ed. Merkel, W.. Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden, 157–180.Google Scholar
Leib, Ethan. 2010. Deliberative Democracy in America: A Proposal for a Popular Branch of Government. University Park: Pennsylvania State Press.Google Scholar
Leighley, Jan E. and Nagler, Jonathan. 2014. Who Votes Now? Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Leighninger, Matthew. 2006. The Next Form of Democracy: How Expert Rule Is Giving Way to Shared Governance – And Why Politics Will Never Be the Same. Nashville: Vanderbilt University Press.Google Scholar
Lengfeld, Holger, and Dilger, Clara. 2018. “Kulturelle und Ökonomische Bedrohung. Eine Analyse der Ursachen der Parteiidentifikation mit der ‘Alternative für Deutschland’ mit dem Sozio-Ökonomischen Panel 2016.” Zeitschrift für Soziologie 47(3): 181–199.Google Scholar
Lergetporer, Philipp, Schwerdt, Guido, Werner, Katharina, West, Martin R., and Woessmann, Ludger. 2018. “How Information Affects Support for Education Spending: Evidence from Survey Experiments in Germany and the United States.” Journal of Public Economics 167(November 2018): 138–157.Google Scholar
Levitsky, Steven, and Ziblatt, Daniel. 2018. How Democracies Die. New York: Broadway Books.Google Scholar
Levitsky, Steven, and Way, Lucan A.. 2002. “Elections without Democracy. The Rise of Competitive Authoiatarianmism.” Journal of Democracy 13(29): 51–65.Google Scholar
Linz, Juan J. 1990. “The Perils of Presidentialism.” Journal of Democracy 1(1): 51–69.Google Scholar
Lipset, Seymour M. 1960. Political Man: The Social Bases of Politics. London: Heinemann.Google Scholar
Lipset, Seymour M., and Rokkan, Stein. 1967. Party Systems and Voter Alignments: Cross-National Perspectives. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Lloren, Anouk, Rosset, Jan, and Wüest, Reto. 2015. “Descriptive and Substantive Representation of Poor Citizens in Switzerland.” Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2733015.Google Scholar
Lloren, Anouk. 2015. “Women’s Substantive Representation: Defending Feminist Interests or Women’s Electoral Preferences?” The Journal of Legislative Studies 21(2): 144–167.Google Scholar
Locke, John. 1960: The Second Treatise of Government, ed. Laslett, P., Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, ch. XIV, §159.Google Scholar
Lord, Christopher. 2013. “No Representation without Justification? Appraising Standards of Justification in European Parliament Debates.” Journal of European Public Policy 20(2): 243–259.Google Scholar
Lord, Christopher. 2017. “An Indirect Legitimacy Argument for a Directly Elected European Parliament.” European Journal of Political Research 56: 512–528.Google Scholar
Lord, Christopher. 2018. “The European Parliament: A Working Parliament without a Public?” The Journal of Legislative Studies 24(1): 34–50.Google Scholar
Lowe, Will, Benoit, Kenneth R., Mikhaylov, Slava, and Laver, Michael. 2011. “Scaling Policy Preferences from Coded Political Texts.” Legislative Studies Quarterly 36(1): 123–155.Google Scholar
Lucassen, Geertje, and Lubbers, Marcel. 2012. “Who Fears What? Explaining Far-Right-Wing Preference in Europe by Distinguishing Perceived Cultural and Economic Ethnic Threats.” Comparative Political Studies 45(5): 547–574.Google Scholar
Luhiste, Maarja. 2015. “Party Gatekeepers’ Support for Viable Female Candidacy in PR-List Systems.” Politics and Gender 11(1): 89–116.Google Scholar
Luhmann, Niklas. 1983. Legitimation durch Verfahren. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp Verlag.Google Scholar
Lührmann, Anna, Gastaldi, Lisa, Grahn, Sandra, Lindberg, Staffan I., Maxwell, Laura, Mechkova, Valeriya, Morgan, Richard, Stepanova, Natalia, and Pillai, Shreeya. 2019. V-Dem Annual Democracy Report 2019. Democracy Facing Global Challenges. V-Dem Institute, University of Gothenburg.Google Scholar
Lupia, Arthur, and Strøm, Kaare. 1995. “Coalition Termination and the Strategic Timing of Parliamentary Elections.” American Political Science Review 89(3): 648–665.Google Scholar
Lupu, Noam, Gervasoni, Carlos, Oliveros, Virginia, and Schiumerini, Luis. 2015. Argentine Panel Election Study.Google Scholar
Lupu, Noam, Oliveros, Virginia, and Schiumerini, Luis, eds. 2019. Campaigns and Voters in Developing Democracies: Argentina in Comparative Perspective. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
Luskin, Robert C., Sood, Gaurav, Fishkin, James S., and Hahn, Kyu S.. 2017. “Deliberative Distortions? Homogenization, Polarization, and Domination in Small Group Deliberations.” Unpublished Manuscript.Google Scholar
Mackenzie, Michael K., and Warren, Mark E.. 2012. “Two Trust-Based Uses of Minipublics in Democratic Systems.” In Deliberative Systems, eds. Mansbridge, J. and Parkinson, J.. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 95–124.Google Scholar
Mair, Peter., and Thomassen, J.. 2010. “Political Representation and Government in the European Union.” Journal of European Public Policy 17(1): 20–35.Google Scholar
Mair, Peter. 2006. “Ruling the Void: The Hollowing of Western Democracy.” New Left Review 42: 25–51.Google Scholar
Mair, Peter. 2013a. Ruling the Void: The Hollowing out of Western Democracy. London, New York: Verso Books.Google Scholar
Mair, Peter. 2013b. Smaghi Versus the Parties: Representative Government and Institutional Constraints. In Politics in the Age of Austerity, eds. Schäfer, Armin and Streeck, Wolfgang, Cambridge: Polity Press, 143–168.Google Scholar
Maisel, L. Sandy, and Stone, Walter J.. 2014. “Candidate Emergence Revisited: The Lingering Effects of Recruitment, Ambition, and Successful Prospects among House Candidates.” Political Science Quarterly 129: 429.Google Scholar
Majone, Giandomenico. 2002. “The European Commission: The Limits of Centralization and the Perils of Parliamentarization.” Governance 15(3): 375–392.Google Scholar
Manin, Bernard. 1997. The Principles of Representative Government. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Manow, Philip. 2019. “Politischer Populismus als Ausdruck von Identitätspolitik? Über einen ökonomischen Ursachenkomplex.” Aus Politik und Zeitgeschichte 69: 9–11.Google Scholar
Mansbridge, Jane, and Parkinson, John, eds. 2012. Deliberative Systems. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Mansbridge, Jane. 1999. “Should Blacks Represent Blacks and Women Represent Women? A Contingent Yes.” Journal of Politics 61(3): 628–657.Google Scholar
Mansbridge, Jane. 2003. “Rethinking Representation.” American Political Science Review 97(4): 515–528.Google Scholar
Mansbridge, Jane. 2009. “A ‘Selection Model’ of Political Representation.” Journal of Political Philosophy 17(4): 369–398.Google Scholar
Mansbridge, Jane. 2010. “Deliberative Polling as the Gold Standard.” The Good Society 19(1): 55–62.Google Scholar
Mansbridge, Jane. 2015. “Should Workers Represent Workers?” Swiss Political Science Review 21(2): 261–270.Google Scholar
Mansbridge, Jane. 2018. “Recursive Representation.” In Creating Political Presence: The New Politics of Democratic Representation, eds. Castiglione, D. and Pollak, J.. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 298–338.Google Scholar
Maoz, Zeev, and Somer-Topcu, Zeynep. 2010. “Political Polarization and Cabinet Stability in Multiparty Systems: A Social Networks Analysis of European Parliaments, 1945–98.” British Journal of Political Science 40(4): 805–833.Google Scholar
Martin, Lanny W., and Vanberg, Georg. 2003. “Wasting Time? The Impact of Ideology and Size on Delay in Coalition Formation.” British Journal of Political Science 33(2): 323–332.Google Scholar
Matthews, Donald R. 1985. “Legislative Recruitment and Legislative Careers.” In Handbook of Legislative Research. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Mattila, Mikko, and Raunio, Tapio. 2006. “Cautious Voters – Supportive Parties: Opinion Congruence between Voters and Parties on the EU Dimension.” European Union Politics 7(4): 427–449.Google Scholar
McAdam, Doug, and Snow, David A.. 1997. Social Movements: Readings on Their Emergence, Immobilization, and Dynamics. Los Angeles: Roxbury Publishing.Google Scholar
McAdam, Doug, and Tarrow, Sidney. 2010. “Ballots and Barricades: On the Reciprocal Relationship between Elections and Social Movements.” Perspectives on Politics 8(2): 529–542. DOI:10.1017/S1537592710001234Google Scholar
McCarty, Nolan, Poole, Keith T. and Rosenthal, Howard. 2006. Polarized America: The Dance of Ideology and Unequal Riches. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
McCarty, Nolan M. 2019. “Polarization and the Changing American Constitutional System.” In Can America Govern Itself? eds. Lee, Frances E. and McCarty, Nolan M.. New York: Cambridge University Press, 301–328.Google Scholar
McGuire, Kevin T. and Stimson, James A.. 2004. “The Least Dangerous Branch Revisited: New Evidence on Supreme Court Responsiveness to Public Preferences.” Journal of Politics 66(4): 1018–1035.Google Scholar
McKay, Spencer. 2019. “A Democratic Theory of Ballot Measures.” PhD dissertation, University of British Columbia, Vancouver.Google Scholar
McLean, Iain. 1991. “Forms of Representation and Systems of Voting.” InPolitical Theory Today, ed. Held, D.. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 172–196.Google Scholar
Mény, Yves, and Surel, Yves. 2002. “The Constitutive Ambiguity of Populism.” In Democracies and the Populist Challenge. London: Palgrave Macmillan UK, Palgrave Macmillan, 1–24.Google Scholar
Merkel, Wolfgang, and Zürn, Michael. 2019. “Conclusion: The Defects of Cosmopolitan and Communitarian Democracy.” In The Struggle over Borders: Cosmopolitanism and Communitarianism, eds. Wilde, P., Koopmans, R., Merkel, W., Strijbis, O., and Zürn, M.. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 207–237.Google Scholar
Merkel, Wolfgang. 2017. “Kosmopolitismus versus Kommunitarismus: Ein neuer Konflikt in der Demokratie.” In Parties, Governments and Elites. Vergleichende Politikwissenschaft, eds. Harfst, P., Kubbe, I., and Poguntke, T.. Wiesbaden: Springer VS, 9–23.Google Scholar
Mettler, Suzanne and Stonecash, Jeffrey M.. 2008. “Government Program Usage and Political Voice.” Social Science Quarterly 89(2): 273–293.Google Scholar
Michailidou, Asimina, and Trenz, Hans-Jörg. 2013. “Mediatized Representative Politics in the European Union: Towards Audience Democracy?” Journal of European Public Policy 20(2): 260–277.Google Scholar
Micozzi, Juan Pablo. 2018. “Division or Union of Labor? Analyzing Workers’ Representation in the Argentine Congress.” Latin American Politics and Society 60(4): 93–112.Google Scholar
Milanović, Branko. 2016. Global Inequality: A New Approach for the Age of Globalization. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Miller, Warren E. and Stokes, Donald W.. 1963. “Constituency Influence in Congress.” American Political Science Review 57: 45–46.Google Scholar
Minkenberg, Michael. 2000. “The Renewal of the Radical Right: Between Modernity and Anti‐modernity.” Government and Opposition 35(2): 170–188.Google Scholar
Mishler, William and Sheehan, Reginald S.. 1993. “The Supreme Court as a Countermajoritarian Institution? The Impact of Public Opinion on Supreme Court Decisions.” American Political Science Review 87(1): 87–101.Google Scholar
Mitchell, Glenn E. and Wlezien, Christopher. 1995. “Voter Registration and Election Laws in the United States, 1972–1992.” Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research 6496: 999.Google Scholar
Montanaro, Laura. 2017. Who Elected Oxfam?: A Democratic Defense of Self-Appointed Representatives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Moravcsik, Andrew. 2002. “In Defence of the ‘Democratic Deficit’: Reassessing the Legitimacy of the European Union.” Journal of Common Market Studies 40(4): 603–634.Google Scholar
Moravcsik, Andrew. 2010. “Affirming Democracy in International Organizations.” Global Challenges in 2030 1(4). Online.Google Scholar
Moravcsik, Andrew. 2018. “Why Populist Foreign Policy Is Doomed to Disappoint.” Colloquium at Queens’ College, Oxford University.Google Scholar
Morel, Nathalie, Palier, Bruno, and Palme, Joakim. 2012. “Beyond the Welfare State as We Knew It?” In Towards a Social Investment Welfare State? Ideas, Policies, and Challenges, eds. Morel, N., Palier, B., and Palme, J.. Bristol and Chicago: Policy Press, 1–30.Google Scholar
Mounk, Yascha, and Kyle, Jordan. 2018. “The Populist Harm to Democracy: An Empirical Assessment.” Published on the website of the Tony Blair Instutute for Global Change (December 26, 2018). https://institute.global/policy/populist-harm-democracy-empirical-assessment.Google Scholar
Mounk, Yascha. 2018. The People vs. Democracy: Why Our Freedom Is in Danger and How to Save It. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Mudde, Cas, and Kaltwasser, Cristóbal Rovira. 2012. Populism in Europe and the Americas: Threat or Corrective for Democracy? Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Mudde, Cas, and Kaltwasser, Cristóbal Rovira. 2018. “Studying Populism in Comparative Perspective: Reflections on the Contemporary and Future Research Agenda.” Comparative Political Studies 51(13): 1667–1693.Google Scholar
Introduction. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Mudde, Cas. 2007. Populist Radical Right Parties in Europe. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Mueller, John E. 1970. “Presidential Popularity from Truman to Johnson.” American Political Science Review 64(1): 18–34.Google Scholar
Müller, Jan-Werner. 2011. Contesting Democracy. Political Ideas in Twentieth-Century Europe. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Mylonas, Harris. 2019. “Greece: Political Developments and Data in 2018.” European Journal of Political Research Political Data Yearbook 58(1): 113–22.Google Scholar
Neblo, Michael A., Esterling, Kevin M., Kennedy, Ryan P., Lazer, David M. J., and Sokhey, Anand E.. 2010. “Who Wants to Deliberate – and Why?” American Political Science Review 104(3): 566–583.Google Scholar
Neblo, Michael A., Esterling, Kevin M., and Lazer, David M. J.. 2018. Politics with the People: Building a Directly Representative Democracy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Neblo, Michael A., Minozzi, William, Esterling, Kevin M., Green, Jon, Kingzette, Jonathon, and Lazer, David M. J.. 2017. “The Need for a Transnational Science of Democracy.” Science 355(6328): 914–915.Google Scholar
Neimanns, Erik, Busemeyer, Marius R., and Garritzmann, Julian. 2018. “How Popular Are Social Investment Policies Really? Evidence from a Survey Experiment in Eight Western European Countries.” European Sociological Review 34(3): 238–253.Google Scholar
Newton, Kenneth, and Geissel, Brigette. 2012. Evaluating Democratic Innovations: Curing the Democratic Malaise? London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Newton, Kenneth. 2001. “Trust, Social Capital, Civil Society, and Democracy.” International Political Science Review 22(2): 201–214.Google Scholar
Niemann, A. 2011. “Conceptualising Common Commercial Policy Treaty revision: explaining stagnancy and dynamics from the Amsterdam IGC to the Treaty of Lisbon.” European Integration online Papers (EIoP), 6(16). http://eiop.or.at/eiop/texte/2011-006a.htm.Google Scholar
Niemeyer, S. 2011. “The Emancipatory Effect of Deliberation: Empirical Lessons from Mini-Publics.” Politics and Society 39(1): 103–140.Google Scholar
Norris, Pippa, and Inglehart, Ronald. 2019. Cultural Backlash: Trump, Brexit, and the Rise of Authoritarian Populism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Norris, Pippa. 1997. Passages to Power: Legislative Recruitment in Advanced Democracies. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Norris, Pippa. 1999. Critical Citizens: Global Support for Democratic Government: Global Support for Democratic Government. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Norris, Pippa. 2011. Democratic Deficit: Critical Citizens Revisited. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Norris, Pippa. 2017. “Is Western Democracy Backsliding? Diagnosing the Risks.” The Journal of Democracy, April 2017, HKS Working Paper No. RWP17-012, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2933655.Google Scholar
Norton, Michael I., and Ariely, Dan. 2011. “Building a Better America – One Wealth Quintile at a Time.” Perspectives on Psychological Science 6(1): 9–12.Google Scholar
OECD 2020. Innovative Citizen Participation and New Democratic Institutions: Catching the Deliberative Wave. Paris: OECD Publishing.Google Scholar
O’Brien, Diana Z. 2018. “‘Righting’ Conventional Wisdom: Women and Right Parties in Established Democracies.” Politics and Gender 14(1): 27–55.Google Scholar
O’Grady, Tom. 2019. “Careerists versus Coalminers: Changes in Legislators’ Backgrounds and the Politics of Welfare Reform.” Comparative Political Studies 52(4): 544–578.Google Scholar
O’Neill, D. and Harcup, T.. 2009. “News Values and Selectivity.” In The Handbook of Journalism Studies, eds. Wahl-Jorgensen, K. and Hanitzsch, T.. Milton Park: Taylor and Francis, 161–174.Google Scholar
Odendahl, Christian, Murray, Jamie, Springford, John, and Johnson, Scott. 2017. The Big European Sort? The Diverging Fortunes of Europe’s Regions. Technical report. Center for European Reform.Google Scholar
Oesch, Daniel. 2008. “Explaining Workers’ Support for Right-Wing Populist Parties in Western Europe: Evidence from Austria.” International Political Science Review 29(3): 349–373.Google Scholar
Oesch, Daniel. 2013. Occupational Change in Europe: How Technology and Education Transform the Job Structure. Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Office of National Statistics. 2012. (Excel sheet), sheet 13. www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/regional-trends/region-and-country-profiles/economy-may-2012/regional-profiles-economy-may-2012.xls.Google Scholar
Ortmann, Stephan, and Thompson, Mark R.. 2016. “China and the Singapore Model.” Journal of Democracy 27(1): 39–48.Google Scholar
Otjes, Simon, and Voerman, Gerrit. 2013. “The Netherlands.” European Journal of Political Research Political Data Yearbook 52(1): 162–169.Google Scholar
Otjes, Simon, and Voerman, Gerrit. 2018. “The Netherlands: Political Development and Data for 2017.” European Journal of Political Research Political Data Yearbook 57(1): 203–211.Google Scholar
Owens, Ryan J., and Wedeking, Justin P.. 2011. “Justices and Legal Clarity: Analyzing the Complexity of U.S Supreme Court Opinions.” Law and Society Review 45(4): 1027–1061.Google Scholar
Page, Benjamin I. and Gilens, Martin. 2017. Democracy in America? Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Page, Benjamin I. and Shapiro, Robert Y.. 1992. The Rational Public: Fifty Years of Trends in Americans’ Policy Preferences. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Page, Benjamin I., Bartels, Larry M. and Seawright, Jason. 2013. “Democracy and the Policy Preferences of Wealthy Americans.” Perspectives on Politics 11(1): 51–73Google Scholar
Pande, Rohini. 2003. “Can Mandated Political Representation Increase Policy Influence for Disadvantaged Minorities?” American Economic Review 93 (4): 1132–1151.Google Scholar
Parthasarathy, Ramya, Rao, Vijayendra, and Palaniswamy, Nethra. 2019. “Deliberative Democracy in an Unequal World: A Text-as-Data Study of South India’s Village Assemblies.” American Political Science Review 113(3): 623–640.Google Scholar
Pavolini, Emmanuele, and Van Lancker, Wim. 2018. “The Matthew Effect in Childcare Use: A Matter of Policies or Preferences?” Journal of European Public Policy 25(6): 878–893.Google Scholar
Pessen, Edward. 1984. The Log Cabin Myth: The Social Backgrounds of the Presidents. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Peters, Yvette, and Ensink, Sander J.. 2015. “Differential Responsiveness in Europe: The Effects of Preference Difference and Electoral Participation.” West European Politics 38(3): 577–600.Google Scholar
Petrocik, John R., Benoit, William L., and Hansen, Glenn J.. 2003. Issue Ownership and Presidential Campaigning, 1952–2000. Political Science Quarterly 118: 599–626.Google Scholar
Petrocik, John R. 1996. “Issue Ownership in Presidential Elections, with a 1980 Case Study. American Journal of Political Science 40: 825–850.Google Scholar
Pettit, P. 2010. “Representation, Responsive and Indicative.” Constellations (Oxford, England) 17(3): 426–434.Google Scholar
Petty, Richard E., and Krosnick, Jon A., eds. 1995. Attitude Strength: Antecedents and Consequences. New York: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
Philpot, Tasha S., Shaw, Daron R., and McGowen, Ernest B.. 2009. “Winning the Race: Black Voter Turnout in the 2008 Presidential Election” Public Opinion Quarterly 73(5): 995–1022.Google Scholar
Pierson, Paul. 1998. “Irresistible Forces, Immovable Objects: Post-Industrial Welfare States Confront Permanent Austerity.” Journal of European Public Policy 5(4): 539–560.Google Scholar
Pierson, Paul. 2001. “Coping with Permanent Austerity: Welfare State Restructuring in Affluent Democracies.” In The New Politics of the Welfare State, ed. Pierson, P.. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 410–456Google Scholar
Pitkin, Hanna Fenichel. 1967. The Concept of Representation. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Pollak, Johannes, and Castiglione, Dario. 2018. “Introduction.” In Creating Political Presence: The New Politics of Democratic Representation, eds. Castiglione, D. and Pollak, J.. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1–15.Google Scholar
Polletta, Francesca, and Gardner, Beth Gharrity. 2018. “The Forms of Deliberative Communication.” In The Oxford Handbook of Deliberative Democracy, eds. Bächtiger, A., Dryzek, J. S., Mansbridge, J. J., and Warren, M. E.. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 70–85Google Scholar
Polletta, Francesca, and Chen, Pang Ching Bobby. 2013. “Gender and Public Talk: Accounting for Womeńs Variable Participation in the Public Sphere.” Sociological Theory 31: 291–317.Google Scholar
Posen, Adam S., and Zettelmeyer, Jeromin. 2019. Facing up to Low Productivity Growth. Peterson Institute for International Economics.Google Scholar
Pow, James, van Dijk, Lisa, and Marien, Sofie (2020), “It Is Not Just the Taking Part that Counts: ‘Like Me’ Perceptions Connect the Wider Public to Minipublics.” Special Issue on Cristina Lafont’s Democracy without Shortcuts, The Journal of Deliberative Democracy 16(2): 43–55.Google Scholar
Proaño Acosta, Christian, Peña, Juan Carlos, and Saalfeld, Thomas. 2019. Inequality, Macroeconomic Performance and Political Polarization: An Empirical Analysis. Bamberg: Bamberg University, Bamberg Economic Research Group (BERG).Google Scholar
Proksch, Sven-Oliver, and Slapin, Jonathan B.. 2014. The Politics of Parliamentary Debate: Parties, Rebels, and Representation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Reckwitz, Andreas. 2019. Das Ende der Illusionen. Politik, Ökonomie und Kultur in der Spätmoderne. Berlin: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
Rehfeld, A. 2009. “Representation Rethought: On Trustees, Delegates, and Gyroscopes in the Study of Political Representation and Democracy.” American Political Science Review 103: 214–230.Google Scholar
Rehm, Philipp, Hacker, Jacob S., and Schlesinger, Mark. 2012. “Insecure Alliances: Risk, Inequality, and Support for the Welfare State.” American Political Science Review 106(2): 386–406.Google Scholar
Reif, Karlheinz, and Schmitt, Hermann. 1980. “Nine Second-Order National Elections: A Conceptual Framework for the Analysis of European Election Results.” European Journal of Political Research 8(1): 3–45.Google Scholar
Reingold, Beth, and Harrell, Jessica. 2010. “The Impact of Descriptive Representation on Women’s Political Engagement: Does Party Matter?” Political Research Quarterly 63(2): 280–294.Google Scholar
Rigby, Elizabeth, and Wright, Gerald C.. 2011. “Whose Statehouse Democracy? Policy Responsiveness to Poor versus Rich Constituents in Poor versus Rich States.” In Who Gets Represented? ed. Enns, Peter K. and Wlezien, Christopher. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
Risse, Thomas. 1995. Cooperation among Democracies: The European Influence on US Foreign Policy. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Rittberger, Berthold, and Schimmelfennig, Frank. 2006. “Explaining the Constitutionalization of the European Union.” Journal of European Public Policy 13(8): 1148–1167.Google Scholar
Rogowski, Ronald. 1989. Commerce and Coalitions: How Trade Affects Domestic Political Alignments. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Rojas, Fabio, and Heaney, Michael. 2015. Party in the Street: The Antiwar Movement and the Democratic Party after 9/11. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Rokkan, Stein, Flora, Peter, Kuhnle, Stein, and Urwin, Derek W.. 1999. State Formation, Nation-Building, and Mass Politics in Europe. The Theory of Stein Rokkan: Based on His Collected Works. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Rooduijn, Matthijs, Kessel, Stijn, Froio, Caterina, Pirro, Andrea, Lange, Sarah, Halikiopoulou, Daphne, Taggart, Paul L., and Mudde, Cas. 2019. “The PopuList: An Overview of Populist, Far Right, Far Left and Eurosceptic Parties in Europe.” Online. www.popu-list.org.Google Scholar
Rosanvallon, Pierre. 2011. Democratic Legitimacy: Impartiality, Reflexivity, Proximity. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Rosén, Guri., and Tørnblad, S. H.. 2019. “How Does Expert Knowledge Travel between EU Institutions? The Case of the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership.” European Politics and Society 20(1): 32–48.Google Scholar
Rosén, Guri. 2017. “The Impact of Norms on Political Decision-Making: How to Account for the European Parliament’s Empowerment in EU External Trade Policy.” Journal of European Public Policy 24(10): 1450–1470.Google Scholar
Rosén, Guri. 2019. “Proving Their Worth? The Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership and the Members of the European Parliament.” Politics and Governance 7(3): 266–278.Google Scholar
Rosenfelder, Joel. 2017. “Die Programmatik der AfD: Inwiefern hat sie sich von einer primär euroskeptischen zu einer rechtspopulistischen Partei entwickelt?” Zeitschrift für Parlamentsfragen 48(1): 123–140.Google Scholar
Rosset, Jan. 2016. Economic Inequality and Political Representation in Switzerland. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
Roßteutscher, Sigrid, Schmitt-Beck, Rüdiger, Schoen, Harald, Weßels, Bernhard, Wolf, Christof, Bieber, Ina, Stövsand, Lars-Christopher, Dietz, Melanie, Scherer, Philipp, Wagner, Aiko, Melcher, Reinhold, and Giebler, Heiko. 2017. Vor- Und Nachwahl-Querschnitt (Kumulation), GLES, GESIS-Datenarchiv, Köln: ZA6802 Datafile, version 3.0.1, doi: 10.4232/1.13236.Google Scholar
Rovira Kaltwasser, Cristóbal, and Van Hauwaert, Steven M.. 2019. “The Populist Citizen: Empirical Evidence from Europe and Latin America.” European Political Science Review 12(1): 1–18.Google Scholar
Ruggie, John G. 1983. “International Regimes, Transactions, and Change: Embedded Liberalism in the Postwar Economic Order.” In International Regimes, ed. Krasner, S. D.. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 195–231.Google Scholar
Rummens, Stefan. 2016. Legitimacy without Visibility? On the Role of Mini-Publics in the Democratic System. InConstitutional Deliberative Democracy in Europe, eds. Reuchamps, M., and Suiter, J.. Colchester: ECPR Press, 129–146Google Scholar
Runciman, David. 2017. The Confidence Trap: A History of Democracy in Crisis from World War I to the Present. Revised Edition. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Russett, Bruce. 1993. Grasping the Democratic Peace. Principles for a Post-Cold War World. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Rustin, Bayard. 1965. From Protest to Politics: The Future of the Civil Rights Movement. Commentary 39.Google Scholar
Rymph, Catherine. 2006. Republican Women: Feminism and Conservatism Form Suffrage through the Rise of the New Right. Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Press.Google Scholar
Saalfeld, Thomas, Bahr, Matthias, and Seifert, Olaf. 2019. “Contractual Arrangements, Formal Institutions and Personalised Crisis Management: Coalition Governance Under Chancellor Merkel (2013–2017).” German Politics 28(3): 371–391.Google Scholar
Saalfeld, Thomas. 2008. “Institutions, Chance and Choices: The Dynamics of Cabinet Survival in the Parliamentary Democracies of Western Europe (1945-99).” In Cabinets and Coalition Bargaining: The Democratic Life Cycle in Western Europe, eds. Strøm, Kaare, Müller, Wolfgang C., and Bergman, Torbjörn. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 327–368.Google Scholar
Sabl, Andrew. 2015. “The Two Cultures of Democratic Theory: Responsiveness, Democratic Quality, and the Empirical-Normative Divide.” Perspectives on Politics 13(2):3345–365.Google Scholar
Sadin, Meredith. 2014. “A Wealth of Ambivalence: How Stereotypes about the Rich Matter for Political Attitudes and Candidate Choice.” PhD Dissertation, Princeton University.Google Scholar
Sanbonmatsu, Kira. 2002. Democrats, Republicans, and the Politics of Women’s Place. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
Sanbonmatsu, Kira. 2003. “Gender-Related Political Knowledge and the Descriptive Representation of Women” Political Behavior 25(4): 367–388.Google Scholar
Sanbonmatsu, Kira. 2006. Where Women Run: Gender and Party in the American States. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
Sanders, David. 2012. “The Effects of Deliberative Polling in an EU-Wide Experiment: Five Mechanisms in Search of an Explanation.” British Journal of Political Science 42(3): 617–640.Google Scholar
Sartori, Giovanni. 1976. Parties and Party Systems: A Framework for Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Savage, Lee M. 2013. “Party System Polarisation and Government Duration in Central and Eastern Europe.” West European Politics 36(5): 1029–1051.Google Scholar
Saward, Michael. 2006. “The Representative Claim.” Contemporary Political Theory 5: 297–318.Google Scholar
Scarrow, Susan E. 2005. Political Parties and Democracy in Theoretical and Practical Perspectives: Implementing Intraparty Democracy. National Democratic Institute for International Affairs.Google Scholar
Schäfer, Andreas, and Merkel, Wolfgang. 2020. “Emanzipation Oder Reaktion: Wie Konservativ Ist Die Deliberative Demokratie?” Politische Vierteljahresschrift 61: 449–472.Google Scholar
Schäfer, Armin. 2017. “Return with a Vengeance: Working Class Anger and the Rise of Populism.” Democracy Papers: SSRC .Google Scholar
Schaffer, Johan K. 2012. “The Boundaries of Transnational Democracy: Alternatives to the All-Affected Principle.” Review of International Studies 38(2): 321–342.Google Scholar
Schaffner, Brian, Ansolabehere, Stephen, and Luks, Samantha. 2019. “Cooperative Election Study Common Content, 2018.” Online. https://dataverse.harvard.edu/dataset.xhtml?persistentId=doi%3A10.7910/DVN/ZSBZ7K.Google Scholar
Schakel, Wouter, and Hakhverdian, Armen. 2018. “Ideological Congruence and Socio-Economic Inequality.” European Political Science Review 10(3): 441–465.Google Scholar
Schakel, Wouter. 2019. “Unequal Policy Responsiveness in the Netherlands.” Socio-Economic Review 39: 553.Google Scholar
Schattschneider, Elmer Eric. 1960. The Semi-Sovereign People: A Realist’s View of Democracy in America. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.Google Scholar
Schelsky, Helmut. 1953. Wandlungen der deutschen Familie in der Gegenwart. Darstellung und Deutung einer empirisch-soziologischen Tatbestandsaufnahme. Dortmund: Ardey.Google Scholar
Schimmelfennig, Frank. 2002. “Liberal Community and Enlargement: An Event History Analysis.” Journal of European Public Policy 9(4): 598–626.Google Scholar
Schleiter, Petra, and Tavits, Margit. 2016. “The Electoral Benefits of Opportunistic Election Timing.” The Journal of Politics 78(3): 836–50.Google Scholar
Schlozman, Kay Lehman, Verba, Sidney and Brady, Henry E.. 2012. The Unheavnely Chorus. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Schmitt, Hermann. 2005. “The European Parliament Elections of June 2004: Still Second Order?” West European Politics 28(3): 650–679.Google Scholar
Schmitt, Hermann, and Thomassen, Jacques, eds. 1999. Political Representation and Legitimacy in the European Union. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Schmitt, Hermann, and Thomassen, Jacques. 2000. “Dynamic Representation. The Case of European Integration.” European Union Politics 1(3): 318–339.Google Scholar
Schmidt, Vivien A. 2013. “Democracy and Legitimacy in the European Union Revisited: Input, Output and ‘Throughput.’” Political Studies 61(1): 2–22.Google Scholar
Schmitt-Beck, Rüdiger, van Deth, Jan W., and Staudt, Alexander. 2017. “Die AfD nach der rechtspopulistischen Wende.” Zeitschrift für Politikwissenschaft 27(3): 273–303.Google Scholar
Schofield, Norman. 1995. “Coalition Politics: A Formal Model and Empirical Analysis.” Journal of Theoretical Politics 7(3): 245–81.Google Scholar
Schwander, Hanna, and Häusermann, Silja. 2013. “Who Is In and Who Is Out? A Risk-Based Conception of Insiders and Outsiders.” Journal of European Social Policy 23(3): 248–269.Google Scholar
Schwartz, Herman. 2014. “Is There a Really Big Trade-off? Housing, Welfare and Pensions Reconsidered from a Balance Sheet Perspective.” ASSA 2014. Working Paper.Google Scholar
Schwarz, Susanne, and Coppock, Alexander. 2022. “What Have We Learned about Gender from Candidate Choice Experiments? A Meta-Analysis of Sixty-Seven Factorial Survey Experiments.” The Journal of Politics 84(2): 655–668.Google Scholar
Schwindt-Bayer, Leslie A. 2010. Political Power and Women’s Representation in Latin America. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Scudder, Mary F. 2020a. Beyond Empathy and Inclusion. The Challenge of Listening in Democratic Deliberation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Scudder, Mary F. 2020b. “The Ideal of Uptake in Democratic Deliberation.” Political Studies 68(2): 504–522,Google Scholar
Sears, David O. and Funk, Carolyn L.. 1990. “The Limited Effect of Economic Self-Interest on the Political Attitudes of the Mass Public.” Journal of Behavioral Economics 19: 247–271.Google Scholar
Shapiro, Robert Y. and Young, John M.. 1986. “The Polls: Medical Care in the United States.” Public Opinion Quarterly 50: 418–428.Google Scholar
Sigelman, Lee, and Buell, Emmett H.. 2004. Avoidance or Engagement? Issue Convergence in U.S. Presidential Campaigns, 1960–2000. American Journal of Political Science 48: 650–661.Google Scholar
Singer, Matthew. 2018. “Delegating Away Democracy: How Good Representation and Policy Successes Can Undermine Democratic Legitimacy.” Comparative Political Studies 51(13): 1754–1788.Google Scholar
Sintomer, Yves, Herzberg, Carston, Röcke, Anja, and Allegretti, Giovanni. 2012. “Transnational Models of Citizen Participation: The Case of Participatory Budgeting.” Journal of Public Deliberation 8(2): 1–32.Google Scholar
Sintomer, Yves. 2013. “The Meanings of Political Representation: Uses and Misuses of a Notion.” Raisons Politiques 50(2): 13–34.Google Scholar
Sintomer, Yves. 2018. “From Deliberative to Radical Democracy? Sortition and Politics in the Twenty-First Century.” Politics and Society 46(3): 337–357Google Scholar
Siu, Alice. 2009. “Look Who’s Talking: Deliberation and Social Influence.” PhD thesis: Stanford University.Google Scholar
Siu, Alice. 2017. “Deliberation and the Challenge of Inequality.” Daedalus. Journal of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences 146(3): 119–128.Google Scholar
Skocpol, Theda and Hertel-Fernandez, Alexander. 2016. “The Koch Network and Republican Party Extremism.” Perspectives on Politics 14(3): 681–699.Google Scholar
Slater, Dan, and Ziblatt, Daniel. 2013. “The Enduring Indispensability of the Controlled Comparison.” Comparative Political Studies 46(10): 1301–1327.Google Scholar
Smith, Alastair. 2003. “Election Timing in Majoritarian Parliaments.” British Journal of Political Science 33(03): 397–418.Google Scholar
Smith, Graham, and Setälä, Maija. 2019. “Mini-Publics and Deliberative Democracy.” In The Oxford Handbook of Deliberative Democracy, edited by Bächtiger, A., Dryzek, J. S., Mansbridge, J., and M. Warren. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 300–314.Google Scholar
Sojourner, Aaron. 2013. “Do Unions Promote Electoral Office-Holding?” Industrial and Labor Relations Review 66(2): 467–486.Google Scholar
Solga, Heike. 2014. “Education, Economic Inequality and the Promises of the Social Investment State.” Socio-Economic Review 12(2): 269–297.Google Scholar
Sørensen, Eva. 2002. “Democratic Theory and Network Governance.” Administrative Theory and Praxis 24(4): 693–720.Google Scholar
Soroka, Stuart N. and Wlezien, Christopher. 2008. “On the Limits to Inequality in Representation.” Political Science and Politics 41: 319–327.Google Scholar
Soroka, Stuart N. and Wlezien, Christopher. 2010. Degrees of Democracy. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Soss, Joe, and Weaver, Vesla. 2016. “Learning from Ferguson: Welfare, Criminal Justice, and the Political Science of Race and Class.” In The Double Bind: The Politics of Racial and Class Inequalities in the Americas, A Report of the Task Force on Racial and Social Class, eds. Hooker, Juliet and Tillery, Alvin B. Jr. Washington, DC: American Political Science Association.Google Scholar
Spoon, Jae-Jae, and Klüver., Heike 2014. “Do Parties Respond? How Electoral Context Influences Party Responsiveness.” Electoral Studies, 35: 48–60.Google Scholar
Statham, Paul, and Trenz, Hans-Jörg. 2015. “Understanding the Mechanisms of EU Politicization: Lessons from the Eurozone Crisis.” Comparative European Politics, 13(3): 287–306.Google Scholar
Statham, Paul, and Koopmans, Ruud. 2009. “Political Party Contestation over Europe in the Mass Media: Who Criticizes Europe, How, and Why?” European Political Science Review 1(3): 435–463.Google Scholar
Steiner, Nils D., and Landwehr, Claudia. 2018. “Populistische Demokratiekonzeptionen und die Wahl der AfD: Evidenz aus einer Panelstudie.” Politische Vierteljahresschrift 59(3): 463–491.Google Scholar
Steinmeier, Frank-Walter. 2018. “27. Wissenschaftlicher Kongress der Deutschen Vereinigung für Politikwissenschaft,” Frankfurt am Main.Google Scholar
Steinmeier, Frank-Walter. 2019. “Geht der Demokratie die Vernunft aus?,” Berlin, September 26, 2018.Google Scholar
Stengel, Frank A., MacDonald, David B., and Nabers, Dirk, eds. 2019. Populism and World Politics. Exploring Inter and Transnational Dimensions. London: Palgrave.Google Scholar
Stimson, James A., MacKuen, Michael B. and Erikson, Robert S.. 1995. “Dynamic Representation.” American Political Science Review 89(3): 543–565.Google Scholar
Stimson, James A. 1991. Public Opinion in America: Moods, Cycles, and Swings. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.Google Scholar
Stimson, James A. 2011. “The Issues in Representation.” In Who Gets Represented? ed. Enns, Peter K. and Wlezien, Christopher. New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 347–360.Google Scholar
Stoker, Gerry, and Hay, Colin. 2017. “Understanding and Challenging Populist Negativity towards Politics: The Perspectives of British Citizens.” Political Studies 65(1): 4–23.Google Scholar
Storz, Anna, and Bernauer, Julian. 2018. “Supply and Demand of Populism: A Quantitative Text Analysis of Cantonal SVP Manifestos.” Swiss Political Science Review 24(4): 525–544.Google Scholar
Streeck, Wolfgang, and Mertens, Daniel. 2013. “Public Finance and the Decline of State Capacity in Democratic Capitalism.” In Politics in the Age of Austerity, eds. Streeck, W. and Schäfer, A.. Cambridge: Polity Press, 25–58.Google Scholar
Suedfeld, Peter, Tetlock, Philip E., and Streufert, Siegfried. 1992. “Conceptual/Integrative Complexity.” InMotivation and Personality: Handbook of Thematic Content Analysis, eds. Smith, C. P., Atkinson, J. W., McClelland, D. C., and Veroff, J.. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 393–400.Google Scholar
Suiter, Jane, Farrell, David, and Harris, Clodagh. 2016. The Irish Constitutional Convention: A case of ‘high legitimacy’? InConstitutional Deliberative Democracy in Europe, eds. Reuchamps, M., and Suiter, J.. Colchester: ECPR Press, 33–52.Google Scholar
Summers, Lawrence. 2013. “Why Stagnation Might Prove to Be the New Normal.” Financial Times (December 15, 2013).Google Scholar
Summers, Lawrence H. 2014. “Reflections on the ‘New Secular Stagnation Hypothesis.’” In Secular Stagnation: Facts, Causes, and Cures, eds. Teulings, C. and Baldwin, R.. London: Centre for Economic Policy Research Press, 27–40.Google Scholar
Sunstein, Cass R. 2002. “On a Danger of Deliberative Democracy.” Daedalus, 131(4): 120–124.Google Scholar
Swers, Michele. 2002. The Difference Women Make. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Swers, Michele. 2013. Women in the Club: Gender and Policy Making in the Senate. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Szakonyi, David. 2016. “Renting Elected Office: Why Businesspeople Become Politicians in Russia.” Dissertation, Columbia University. https://academiccommons.columbia.edu/doi/10.7916/D8N879WQ.Google Scholar
Szakonyi, David. 2019. “Private Sector Policymaking: Business Background and Politicians’ Behavior in Office.” https://ssrn.com/abstract=3101095.Google Scholar
Taflaga, Marija, and Beauregard, Katrine. 2020. “The Merit of Party Institutions: Women’s Descriptive Representation and Conservative Parties in Australia and the United Kingdom.” Journal of Women, Politics and Policy 41(1): 66–90.Google Scholar
Taggart, Paul. 2004. “Populism and Representative Politics in Contemporary Europe.” Journal of Political Ideologies 9(3): 269–288.Google Scholar
Tarrow, Sidney G. 1998. Power in Movement: Social Movements and Contentious Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Tarrow, Sidney. 1993. “Cycles of Collective Action: Between Moments of Madness and the Repertoire of Contention.” Social Science History 17(2): 281–307.Google Scholar
Tausczik, Yla R., and Pennebaker, James W.. 2010. “The Psychological Meaning of Words: LIWC and Computerized Text Analysis Methods.” Journal of Language and Social Psychology 29(1): 24–54.Google Scholar
Teorell, Jan. 1999. “A Deliberative Defence of Intraparty Democracy.” Party Politics 5(3): 363–382.Google Scholar
Tetlock, Philip E. 1983. “Accountability and Complexity of Thought.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 45(1): 74–83.Google Scholar
Tirole, Jean. 1985. “Asset Bubbles and Overlapping Generations.” Econometrica: Journal of the Econometric Society 53(6): 1071–1100.Google Scholar
Toshkov, D. 2011. “Public Opinion and Policy Output in the European Union: A Lost Relationship.” European Union Politics 12(2): 169–191.Google Scholar
Treisman, Daniel. 2021. “Is Democracy in Danger? Assessing the Risk with Historical Data.” Online. https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5a4d2512a803bb1a5d9aca35/t/61fec5ddc443042350d29490/1644086750993/draft+sept+2021.pdf.Google Scholar
Trenz, Hans-Jörg, Conrad, Maximilian, and Rosén, Guri. 2009. “Impartial Mediator or Critical Watchdog? The Role of Political Journalism in EU Constitution-Making.” Comparative European Politics 7(3): 342–363.Google Scholar
Tsebelis, George. 2002. Veto Players: How Institutions Work. New York and Princeton: Russell Sage Foundation and Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Učeň, Peter. 2007. “Parties, Populism, and Anti-Establishment Politics in East Central Europe.” SAIS Review of International Affairs 27(1): 49–62.Google Scholar
Ura, Joseph Daniel, and Ellis, Christopher R.. 2008. “Income, Preferences, and the Dynamics of Policy Responsiveness.” PS: Political Science and Politics 41(4): 785–794.Google Scholar
Urbinati, Nadia, and Warren, Mark. E.. 2008. “The Concept of Representation in Contemporary Democratic Theory.” Annual Review of Political Science 11: 387–412.Google Scholar
Urbinati, Nadia. 2000. “Representation as Advocacy. A Study of Democratic Deliberation.” Political Theory 28(6): 758–786.Google Scholar
Urbinati, Nadia. 2019a. “Political Theory of Populism.” Annual Review of Political Science 22(1): 111–127.Google Scholar
Urbinati, Nadia. 2019b. Me the People: How Populism Transforms Democracy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Van Kersbergen, Kees, Vis, Barbara, and Hemerijck, Anton. 2014. “The Great Recession and Welfare State Reform: Is Retrenchment Really the Only Game Left in Town?” Social Policy and Administration 48(7): 883–904.Google Scholar
Van Kessel, Stijn. 2015. Populist Parties in Europe: Agents of Discontent? Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Van Lancker, Wim. 2013. “Putting the Child-Centred Investment Strategy to the Test: Evidence for the EU27.” European Journal of Social Security 15(1): 4–27.Google Scholar
Van Oorschot, Wim. 2006. “Making the Difference in Europe: Deservingness Perceptions among Citizens of European Welfare States.” Journal of European Social Policy 16(1): 23–42.Google Scholar
Vandenbroucke, Frank, and Vleminckx, Koen. 2011. “Disappointing Poverty Trends: Is the Social Investment State to Blame?” Journal of European Social Policy 21(5): 450–471.Google Scholar
Vasilopoulou, S. and K. Gattermann. 2013. “Matching Policy Preferences: The Linkage between Voters and MEPs.” Journal of European Public Policy, 20: 606–625.Google Scholar
Veri, Francesco. 2022, “Mapping Democratic Innovations: A Bottom-up Empirical Perspective.” Representation. Online. DOI: 10.1080/00344893.2022.2075032Google Scholar
Vivyan, Nick, Wagner, Markus, Glinitzer, Konstantin, and Eberl, Jakob-Moritz. 2020. “Do Humble Beginnings Help? How Politician Class Roots Shape Voter Evaluations.” Electoral Studies 63: 1–13.Google Scholar
Vlandas, Tim. 2018. “Grey Power and the Economy: Aging and Inflation across Advanced Economies.” Comparative Political Studies 51(4): 514–552.Google Scholar
Volkens, Andrea, Krause, Werner, Lehmann, Pola, Matthieß, Theres, Merz, Nicoals, Regel, Sven, and Weßels, Bernhard. 2019. “The Manifesto Data Collection. Manifesto Project (MRG/CMP/MARPOR). Version 2019b.” Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin für Sozialforschung (WZB).Google Scholar
Vowles, Jack. 1995. “The Politics of Electoral Reform in New Zealand.” International Political Science Review 16(1): 95–115.Google Scholar
Waldner, David, and Lust, Ellen. 2018. “Unwelcome Change: Coming to Terms with Democratic Backsliding.” Annual Review of Political Science 21: 93–113.Google Scholar
Walker, Hannah L. 2020. Mobilized by Injustice: Criminal Justice Contact, Political Participation, and Race. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Wampler, Brian. 2010. Participatory Budgeting in Brazil: Contestation, Cooperation, and Accountability. University Park: Pennsylvania State Press.Google Scholar
Warren, Mark. E. 2008. “Citizen Representatives.” In Designing Deliberative Democracy, eds. by Warren, M. E. and Pearse., H.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 50–69.Google Scholar
Warren, Mark. E., and Gastil, John. 2015. “Can Deliberative Minipublics Address the Cognitive Challenges of Democratic Citizenship?” The Journal of Politics 77(2): 562–574.Google Scholar
Warren, Mark E. 2002. “What Can Democratic Participation Mean Today?” Political Theory 30:678–702.Google Scholar
Warren, Mark E. 2003. “A Second Transformation of Democracy?” In Democracy Transformed: Expanding Political Opportunities in Advanced Industrial Democracies, eds. Cain, B., Dalton, R., and Scarrow, S.. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 223–249.Google Scholar
Warren, Mark E. 2009. “Governance-Driven Democratization.” Critical Policy Studies 3(1): 3–13.Google Scholar
Warren, Mark E. 2017. “A Problem-Based Approach to Democratic Theory.” American Political Science Review 111(1): 39–53.Google Scholar
Warwick, Paul V. 1994. Government Survival in Parliamentary Democracies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Warwick, Paul V. 1998. “Policy Distance and Parliamentary Government.” Legislative Studies Quarterly 23(3): 319–345.Google Scholar
Webb, Paul, and Childs, Sarah. 2012. “Gender Politics and Conservatism: The View from the British Conservative Party Grassroots 1.” Government and Opposition 47(1): 21–48.Google Scholar
Weiler, J.H.H., Haltern, Ulrich R., and Mayer, Frank C.. 1995. “European Democracy and its Critique.” West European Politics. 18(3): 4-39.Google Scholar
Weyland, Kurt. 2001. “Clarifying a Contested Concept: Populism in the Study of Latin American Politics.” Comparative Politics 34(1): 1–22.Google Scholar
Weyland, Kurt. 2017. “Populism: A Political-Strategic Approach.” In The Oxford Handbook of Populism, eds. Kaltwasser, C. R., Taggart, P. L., Espejo, P. O., and Ostiguy, P.. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 48–72.Google Scholar
Wilensky, Harold L. 1975. The Welfare State and Equality: Structural and Ideological Roots of Public Expenditures. Berkeley, Los Angeles, London: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Wineinger, Catherine, and Nugent, Mary K.. 2020. “Framing Identity Politics: Right-Wing Women as Strategic Party Actors in the UK and US.” Journal of Women, Politics and Policy 41(1): 91–118.Google Scholar
Wineinger, Catherine. 2018. “Gendering Republican Party Culture.” In The Right Women: Republican Party Activists, Candidates, and Legislators, eds. Och, M. and Shames, S. L.. Santa Barbara: Praeger, 25–49.Google Scholar
Witko, Christopher, Morgan, Jana, Kelly, Nathan J., and Enns, Peter K.. 2021. Hijacking the Agenda: Economic Power and Political Influence. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
Wlezien, Christopher and Soroka, Stuart. 2011. “Inequality in Policy Responsiveness?” In Who Gets Represented?, eds. Enns, Peter K. and Wlezien, Christopher. New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 285–310.Google Scholar
Wlezien, Christopher. 1996. “Dynamics of Representation: The Case of U.S. Spending on Defense.” British Journal of Political Science 26: 81–103.Google Scholar
Wlezien, Christopher. 2004. “Patterns of Representation: Dynamics of Public Preferences and Policy.” Journal of Politics 66(1): 1–24.Google Scholar
Wodak, Ruth, Nik, Majid Khosravi, and Mral, Brigitte, eds. 2013. Right-Wing Populism in Europe: Politics and Discourse. London: A&C Black.Google Scholar
Woff, Edward N. 2017. “Household Wealth Trends in the United States, 1962 to 2016: Has Middle Class Wealth Recovered?” NBER Working Paper No. 24085.Google Scholar
Wolbrecht, Christina, and Campbell, David E.. 2007. “Leading by Example: Female Members of Parliament as Political Role Models.” American Journal of Political Science 51(4): 921–939.Google Scholar
Wolbrecht, Christina, and Campbell, David E.. 2017. “Role Models Revisited: Youth, Novelty, and the Impact of Female Candidates.” Politics, Groups, and Identities 5(3): 418–434.Google Scholar
Wolbrecht, Christina. 2000. The Politics of Women’s Rights: Parties, Positions, and Change. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Wolfinger, Raymond E. and Rosenstone, Steven J.. 1980. Who Votes? New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Wüest, Reto, and Pontusson, Jonas. 2018. “Descriptive Misrepresentation by Social Class: Do Voter Preferences Matter?” https://unequaldemocracies.unige.ch/files/5815/2094/9713/Wuest-Pontusson.pdf.Google Scholar
Wyss, Dominik, Beste, Simon, and Bächtiger, André. 2015. “A Decline in the Quality of Debate? The Evolution of Cognitive Complexity in Swiss Parliamentary Debates on Immigration (1968–2014).” Swiss Political Science Review 21(4): 636–653.Google Scholar
Young, Alasdair R. 2016. “Not Your Parents’ Trade Politics: The Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership Negotiations.” Review of International Political Economy 23(3): 345–378.Google Scholar
Young, Iris Marion. 2001. “Equality of Whom? Social Groups and Judgement of Injustice.” The Journal of Political Philosophy 9(1): 1–18.Google Scholar
Zaller, John. 2003. “Coming to Grips with V.O. Key’s Concept of Latent Opinion.” In Electoral Democracy, eds. MacKuen, Michael B. and Rabinowitz, George. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 311–336.Google Scholar
Zernike, Kate. 2018. “‘Don’t Run This Year’: The Perils for Republican Women Facing a Flood of Resistance.” The New York Times (August 13, 2018).Google Scholar
Zürn, Michael, and de Wilde, Pieter. 2016. “Debating Globalization: Cosmopolitanism and Communitarianism as Political Ideologies.” Journal of Political Ideologies 21(3): 280–301.Google Scholar
Zürn, Michael. 2000. “Democratic Governance beyond the Nation-State. The EU and Other International Institutions.” European Journal of International Relations 6(2): 183–221.Google Scholar
Zürn, Michael. 2004. “Global Governance and Legitimacy Problems.” Government and Opposition 30(2): 260–287.Google Scholar
Zürn, Michael. 2013. “Die Schwindende Macht Der Mehrheiten: Weshalb Legitimationskonflikte in Der Demokratie Zunehmen Werden.” WZB Mitteilungen (139): 10–13.Google Scholar
Zürn, Michael. 2014. “The Politicization of World Politics and Its Effects: Eight Propositions.” European Political Science Review 6(1): 47–71.Google Scholar
Zürn, Michael. 2018. “How the Taming of the Class Conflict Produced Authoritarian Populism.” SSRC Items. https://items.ssrc.org/how-the-taming-of-the-class-conflict-produced-authoritarian-populism/.Google Scholar
Zürn, Michael. 2018. A Theory of Global Governance: Authority, Legitimacy, and Contestation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Zürn, Michael. 2021. “How Non-Majoritarian Institutions Make Silent Majorities Vocal.” Perspective on Politics. Online. DOI:10.1017/S1537592721001043.Google Scholar