Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-p9bg8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-19T11:56:11.142Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Beclouding Party Position as an Electoral Strategy: Voter Polarization, Issue Priority and Position Blurring

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 June 2018

Kyung Joon Han
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Why do political parties present vague positions? We suggest that voter polarization provides them incentives to present either clear or vague positions, and the choice between these two is determined by the priority of an issue for the parties. We find that facing voter polarization, Western European political parties present clearer positions on an issue when it is a prime issue for them, but blur their positions when it is a secondary issue. Then, position blurring gives different implications to party systems with different degrees of issue dimensionality (such as American vs Western European party systems). The results also imply that political parties will respond to ongoing voter polarization on economic and immigration issues differently in the clarity of their position.

Keywords

position blurringvoter polarizationissue priorityissue salienceparty supporter division
Type
Articles
Information
British Journal of Political Science , Volume 50 , Issue 2 , April 2020 , pp. 653 - 675
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2018

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

*

Department of Political Science, The University of Tennessee (email: [email protected]). Data replication sets are available in Harvard Dataverse at https://dx./doi.org/10.7910/DVN/VCTLTE and online appendices at https://doi.org/10.1017/S0007123417000618

References

Abou-Chadi, Tarik. 2016. Niche Party Success and Mainstream Party Policy Shifts: How Green and Radical Right Parties Differ in Their Impact. British Journal of Political Science 46 (2):417–436.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Adams, James, Clark, Michael, Ezrow, Lawrence, and Glasgow, Garrett. 2004. Understanding Change and Stability in Party Ideologies: Do Parties Respond to Public Opinion or to Past Election Results? British Journal of Political Science 34 (4):589–610.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Adams, Jaems, Ezrow, Lawrence, and Somer-Topcu, Zeynep. 2011. Is Anybody Listening? Evidence that Voters Do Not Respond to European Parties’ Policy Statements during Elections. American Journal of Political Science 55 (2):370–382.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Adams, Jaems, Ezrow, Lawrence, and Somer-Topcu, Zeynep. 2014. Do Voters Respond to Party Manifestos or to a Wider Information Environment? An Analysis of Mass-Elite Linkages on European Integration. American Journal of Political Science 58 (4):967–978.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Adams, James, Haupt, Andrea B., and Stoll, Heather. 2009. What Moves Parties? The Role of Public Opinion and Global Economic Conditions in Western Europe. Comparative Political Studies 42 (5):611–639.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Adams, James, Merrill, Samuel III, and Grofman, Bernard. 2005. A Unified Theory of Party Competition: A Cross-National Analysis Integrating Spatial and Behavioral Factors. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alvarez, R. Michael, and Franklin, Charles H.. 1994. Uncertainty and Political Perceptions. Journal of Politics 56 (3):671–688.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aragonès, Enriqueta, and Neeman, Zvika. 2000. Strategic Ambiguity in Electoral Competition. Journal of Theoretical Politics 12 (2):183–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bartels, Larry M. 1986. Issue Voting Under Uncertainty: An Empirical Test. American Journal of Political Science 30 (4):709–728.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Basinger, Scott J., and Lavine, Howard. 2005. Ambivalence, Information, and Electoral Choice. American Political Science Review 99 (2):169–184.CrossRefGoogle 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 (3):571–597.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carmines, Edward G., and Stimson, James A.. 1980. The Two Faces of Issue Voting. American Political Science Review 74 (1):78–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carmines, Edward G., and Stimson, James A.. 1989. Issue Evolution: Race and the Transformation of American Politics. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Clark, Michael. 2009. Valence and Electoral Outcomes in Western Europe, 1976–1998. Electoral Studies 28:111–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dalton, Russell J. 1985. Political Parties and Political Representation: Party Supporters and Party Elites in Nine Nations. Comparative Political Studies 18 (3):267–299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dalton, Russell J., Farrell, David M., and McAllister, Ian. 2011. Political Parties and Democratic Linkage: How Parties Organize Democracy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Sio, Lorenzo, and Weber, Till. 2014. Issue Yield: A Model of Party Strategy in Multidimensional Space. American Political Science Review 108 (4):870–885.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
de Vries, Catherine E., van der Brug, Wouter, van Egmond, Marcel H., and van der Eijk, Cees. 2011. Individual and Contextual Variation in EU Issue Voting: The Role of Political Information. Electoral Studies 20:16–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dolezal, Martin, Ennser-Jedenastik, Laurenz, Müller, Wolfgang C., and Winkler, Anna Katharina. 2014. How Parties Compete for Votes: A Test of Salience Theory. European Journal of Political Research 53 (1):57–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Down, Ian, and Wilson, Carole J.. 2010. Opinion Polarization and Inter-Party Competition on Europe. European Union Politics 11 (1):61–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Downs, Anthony. 1957. An Economic Theory of Democracy. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
Enelow, James, and Hinich, Melvin J.. 1981. A New Approach to Voter Uncertainty in the Downsian Spatial Model. American Journal of Political Science 25 (3):483–493.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ensley, Michael J. 2007. Candidate Divergence, Ideology, and Vote Choice in U.S. Senate Elections. American Politics Research 35 (1):103–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fernandez-Vazquez, Pablo. 2014. And Yet it Moves: The Effect of Election Platforms on Party Policy Images. Comparative Political Studies 47 (14):1919–1944.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Finseraas, Henning. 2008. Income Inequality and Demand for Redistribution: A Multilevel Analysis of European Public Opinion. Scandinavian Political Studies 32 (1):94–119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fiske, Susan T., and Taylor, Shelley E.. 1991. Social Cognition. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Gerber, Alan, and Green, Donald. 1999. Misperceptions about Perceptual Bias. Annual Review of Political Science 2:189–210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gill, Jeff. 2005. An Entropy Measure of Uncertainty in Vote Choice. Electoral Studies 24 (3):371–392.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Green, Samuel B., Akey, Theresa M., Fleming, Kandace K., Hershberger, Scott L., and Marquis, Janet G.. 1997. Effect of the Number of Scale Points on Chi-Square Fit Indices in Confirmatory Factor Analysis. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal 4 (2):108–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Green-Pedersen, Christoffer, and Mortensen, Peter B.. 2010. Who Sets the Agenda and Who Responds to it in the Danish Parliament? A New Model of Issue Competition and Agenda-Setting. European Journal of Political Research 49 (2):257–281.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Han, Kyung Joon. 2016. Income Inequality and Voting for Radical Right-Wing Parties. Electoral Studies 42:54–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Han, Kyung Joon. 2017. It Hurts When it Really Matters: Electoral Effect of Party Position Shift Regarding Sociocultural Issues. Party Politics 23 (6):821–833.Google Scholar
Han, Kyung Joon. 2018. Beclouding Party Position as an Electoral Strategy: Voter Polarization, Issue Dimensionality, and Position Blurring, doi:10.7910/DVN/VCTLTE, Harvard Dataverse, V1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hetherington, Marc J. 2001. Resurgent Mass Partisanship: The Role of Elite Polarization. American Political Science Review 95 (3):619–631.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hogg, Michael A., and Abrams, Dominic. 1988. Social Identifications: A Social Psychology of Intergroup Relations and Group Processes. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Hooghe, Liesbet, Marks, Gary and Wilson, Carole J.. 2002. Does Left/Right Structure Party Positions on European Integration? Comparative Political Studies 35 (8):965–989.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ivarsflaten, Elisabeth. 2005. The Vulnerable Populist Right Parties: No Economic Re-alignment Fuelling Their Electoral Success. European Journal of Political Research 44 (3):465–492.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jacobson, Gary C. 2005. Polarized Politics and the 2004 Congressional and Presidential Elections. Political Science Quarterly 120 (2):199–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jacobson, Gary C.. 2011. A Divider, Not a Uniter: George W. Bush and the American People. Boston, MA: Longman.Google Scholar
Krosnick, Jon A., and Kinder, Donald R.. 1990. Altering the Foundations of Support for the President through Priming. American Political Science Review 84 (2):497–512.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lachat, Romain. 2008. The Impact of Party Polarization on Ideological Voting. Electoral Studies 27:687–698.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lachat, Romain. 2014. Issue Ownership and the Vote: The Effects of Associative and Competence Ownership on Issue Voting. Swiss Political Science Review 20 (4):727–740.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Laver, Michael. 2005. Policy and the Dynamics of Political Competition. American Political Science Review 99 (2):263–281.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lijphart, Arend. 1999. Patterns of Democracy: Government Forms and Performance in Thirty-Six Countries. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Lo, James, Proksch, Sven-Oliver, and Slapin, Jonathan B.. 2016. Ideological Clarity in Multiparty Competition: A New Measure and Test Using Election Manifestoes. British Journal of Political Science 46 (3):591–610.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mudde, Cas. 2007. Populist Radical Right Parties in Europe. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Müller-Rommel, Ferdinand. 1985. Social Movements and the Greens: New Internal Politics in Germany. European Journal of Political Research 13 (1):53–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Page, Benjamin I. 1978. Choices and Echoes in Presidential Elections. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Rabinowitz, George, and Macdonald, Stuart Elaine. 1989. A Directional Theory of Issue Voting. American Political Science Review 83 (1):93–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
RePass, David E. 1971. Issue Salience and Party Choice. American Political Science Review 65 (2):389–400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Riker, William H. 1996. The Strategy of Rhetoric: Campaigning for the American Constitution. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Robertson, David B. 1976. A Theory of Party Competition. London: Wiley.Google Scholar
Rovny, Jan. 2012. Who Emphasizes and Who Blurs? Party Strategies in Multidimensional Competition. European Union Politics 13 (2):269–292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rovny, Jan. 2013. Where Do Radical Right Parties Stand? Position Blurring in Multidimensional Competition. European Political Science Review 5 (1):1–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rovny, Jan, and Edwards, Erica E.. 2012. Struggle over Dimensionality: Party Competition in Western and Eastern Europe. East European Politics and Societies 26 (1):56–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sartori, Giovanni. 1968. Representational Systems. International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences 13:470–475.Google Scholar
Shayo, Moses. 2009. A Model of Social Identity with an Application to Political Economy: Nation, Class, and Redistribution. American Political Science Review 103 (2):147–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shepsle, Kenneth A. 1972. The Strategy of Ambiguity: Uncertainty and Electoral Competition. American Political Science Review 66 (2):555–568.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Somer-Topcu, Zeynep. 2015. Everything to Everyone: The Electoral Consequences of the Broad-Appeal Strategy in Europe. American Journal of Political Science 59 (4):841–854.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stokes, Donald E. 1963. Spatial Model of Party Competition. American Political Science Review 57 (2):368–377.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tavits, Margit. 2007. Principle vs. Pragmatism: Policy Shifts and Political Competition. American Journal of Political Science 51 (1):151–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tomz, Michael, and van Houweling, Robert P.. 2009. The Electoral Implications of Candidate Ambiguity. American Political Science Review 103 (1):83–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van der Brug, Wouter. 2004. Issue Ownership and Party Choice. Electoral Studies 23:209–233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van der Ejik, Cees. 2001. Measuring Agreement in Ordered Rating Scales. Quality and Quantity 35 (3):325–341.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van der Ejik, Cees, Schmitt, Hermann, and Binder, Tanja. 2005. Left-Right Orientations and Party Choice. Pp. 167–191 in The European Voter: A Comparative Study of Modern Democracies, edited by Jacques Thomassen. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van de Wardt, Marc. 2014. Putting the Damper on: Do Parties De-emphasize Issues in Response to Internal Divisions among Their Supporters? Party Politics 20 (3):330–340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Volkens, Andrea, Lehmann, Pola, Merz, Nicolas, Regel, Sven, Werner, Annika, Lacewell, Onawa, and Schultze, Henrike. 2014. The Manifesto Data Collection: Manifesto Project. Available from https://manifestoproject.wzb.eu/.Google Scholar
Walgrave, Stefaan, Lefevere, Jonas, and Tresch, Anke. 2012. The Associative Dimension of Issue Ownership. Public Opinion Quarterly 76 (4):771–782.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walgrave, Stefaan, Tresch, Anke, and Lefevere, Jonas. 2015. The Conceptualisation and Measurement of Issue Ownership. West European Politics 38 (4):778–796.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weaver, R. Kent. 1986. The Politics of Blame Avoidance. Journal of Public Policy 6 (4):371–398.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zaller, John. 1992. The Nature and Origins of Mass Opinion. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Supplementary material: PDF

Han supplementary material

Han supplementary material 1

Download Han supplementary material(PDF)
PDF 466 KB
Supplementary material: Link

Han Dataset

Dataset

https://dx./doi.org/10.7910/DVN/VCTLTE
Link