Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rdxmf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T07:57:26.393Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The knowledge gap in world politics: Assessing the sources of citizen awareness of the United Nations Security Council

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 January 2016

Lisa Maria Dellmuth
Lisa Maria Dellmuth*
Affiliation:
Assistant Professor, Department of Political Science, Stockholm University
*
*Correspondence to: Lisa Maria Dellmuth is an Assistant Professor at the Department of Political Science at Stockholm University. Author’s email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The past decades have seen a significant expansion in the scope and authority of international organisations (IOs), raising questions about who participates and is represented in the public contestation of IOs. An important precondition for citizens to become critically involved in the public debate about an IO is that they are aware of the politics of that IO. This article sheds light on this largely unexplored issue, asking why some citizens are more aware of IOs than others. This question is examined in the context of a powerful international organisation, the United Nations Security Council. Using a multilevel analysis of citizens in 17 Asian and European countries, this article argues that citizen knowledge about the Council is shaped by economic conditions and cosmopolitan identity. Higher levels of knowledge are found among the wealthier, and there is some evidence that income inequality depresses knowledge among poorer citizens. Furthermore, citizens identifying with groups or individuals across nation-state borders are more likely to know more about the Council. The article sketches broader implications for the study of the politicisation of IOs and citizen representation in the public contestation of IOs.

Keywords

Political KnowledgePublic OpinionInternational OrganisationsUnited Nations Security CouncilPoliticisation
Type
Articles
Information
Review of International Studies , Volume 42 , Issue 4 , October 2016 , pp. 673 - 700
Copyright
© British International Studies Association 2016 

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.)

References

1 Data and supplemental information necessary to reproduce the numerical results is available on the author’s homepage at: {http://www.lisadellmuth.net}.

2 Tarrow, Sidney, ‘Transnational politics: Contention and institutions in international politics’, Annual Review of Political Science, 4:1 (2001), pp. 1–20 Google Scholar; de Wilde, Pieter and Zürn, Michael, ‘Can the politicization of European integration be reversed?’, Journal of Common Market Studies, 50:1 (2012), pp. 139–153 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Zürn, Michael, Binder, Martin, and Ecker-Ehrhardt, Matthias, ‘International political authority and its politicization’, International Theory, 4:1 (2012), pp. 69–106 Google Scholar.

3 Zürn, ‘The politicization of world politics and its effects: Eight propositions’; see also Schmitter, Philippe, ‘Three neo-functionalist hypotheses about international integration’, International Organization, 23:1 (1969), pp. 161–166 Google Scholar.

4 Zürn, Binder, and Ecker-Erhardt, ‘International political authority’; Ecker-Erhardt, Matthias, ‘Why parties politicise international institutions: On globalisation backlash and authority contestation’, Review of International Political Economy, published online (18 February 2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Rixen, Thomas and Zangl, Bernhard, ‘The politicization of international economic institutions in US public debates’, Review of International Organization, 8:3 (2013), pp. 363–387 Google Scholar; Rauh, Christian, ‘Communicating supranational governance? The salience of EU affairs in the German Bundestag’, European Union Politics, 16:1 (2015), pp. 116–138 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

5 Koehn, Peter H. and Rosenau, James N., ‘Transnational competence in an emergent epoch’, International Studies Perspectives, 3:2 (2002), pp. 105–127 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Koehn, Peter H. and Rosenau, James N., Transnational Competence: Empowering Curriculum for Horizon-Rising Challenges (Boulder, CO: Paradigm, 2009)Google Scholar.

6 Hainmueller, Jens and Hiscox, Michael J., ‘Learning to love globalization: Education and individual attitudes towards international trade’, International Organization, 60:2 (2006), pp. 469–498 Google Scholar; Mau, Steffen, Mewes, Jan, and Zimmermann, Ann, ‘Cosmopolitan attitudes through transnational practices’, Global Networks, 8:1 (2008), pp. 1–24 Google Scholar; Ecker-Ehrhardt, Matthias, ‘Cosmopolitan politicization: How perceptions of interdependence foster citizens’ expectations in international institutions’, European Journal of International Relations, 18:3 (2012), pp. 481–508 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

7 Mansfield, Cf. Edward D. and Mutz, Diana C., ‘Support for free trade: Self-interest, sociotropic politics, and out-group anxiety’, International Organization, 63:3 (2009), pp. 159–181 Google Scholar; Milner, Helen V. and Tingley, Dustin, ‘Public opinion and foreign aid: a review essay’, International Interactions, 39:3 (2013), pp. 389–401 Google Scholar.

8 Caldeira, Cf. Gregory M. and Gibson, James L., ‘The legitimacy of the court of justice: Models of institutional support’, American Political Science Review, 89:2 (1995), pp. 356–376 Google Scholar; Norris, Pippa, ‘Global governance and cosmopolitan citizens’, in Joseph S. Nye Jr. and Elaine C. Kamarck (eds), Governance in a Globalizing World (Washington, DC: Brookings, 2000), pp. 155–177 Google Scholar; Norris, Pippa, ‘Confidence in the United Nations: Cosmopolitan and nationalistic attitudes’, in Yilmaz Esmer and Thorleif Petterson (eds), The International System, Democracy and Values (Uppsala: Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis, 2009), pp. 17–49 Google Scholar; Hainmueller and Hiscox, ‘Learning to love globalization’; Edwards, Martin S., ‘Public support for the international economic organizations: Evidence from developing countries’, Review of International Organizations, 4:2 (2009), pp. 185–209 Google Scholar; Zürn, Binder, and Ecker-Erhardt, ‘International authority and its politicization’; Milner, Helen V. and Tingley, Dustin H., ‘Public opinion and foreign aid: a review essay’, International Interactions: Empirical and Theoretical Research in International Relations, 39:3 (2013), pp. 389–401 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

9 Delli Carpini, Michael X. and Keeter, Scott, What Americans Know about Politics and Why it Matters (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1996)Google Scholar.

10 Highton, Benjamin, ‘Revisiting the relationship between educational attainment and political sophistication’, Journal of Politics, 71:4 (2009), p. 1564 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

11 Cf. Hainmueller and Hiscox, ‘Learning to love globalization’.

12 Carpini, Cf. Delli and Keeter, , What Americans Know about Politics and Why it Matters, pp. 6–7 Google Scholar.

13 Delli Carpini and Keeter, What Americans Know about Politics and Why it Matters; in addition, see earlier works about the unequal distribution of political knowledge and the consequences for the political representation of citizens’ interests, Griffin, John D. and Newman, Brian, ‘Are voters better represented?’, Journal of Politics, 67:4 (2005), pp. 1206–1227 Google Scholar; Verba, Sidney, Schlozman, Kay Lehman, and Brady, Henry E., Voice and Equality: Civic Volunteerism in American Politics (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

14 Steffek, Jens and Nanz, Patrizia, ‘Emergent patterns of civil society participation in global and European governance’, in Jens Steffek, Claudia Kissling, and Patrizia Nanz (eds), Civil Society Participation in European and Global Governance: A Cure for the Democratic Deficit? (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2008), p. 8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Dellmuth, Lisa M. and Tallberg, Jonas, ‘The social legitimacy of international organisations: Interest representation, institutional performance, and confidence extrapolation in the United Nations’, Review of International Studies, 41:3 (2015), pp. 451–475 Google Scholar.

15 Scholte, Jan A., ‘Civil society and democratically accountable global governance’, Government and Opposition, 39:2 (2004), pp. 211–233 Google Scholar; Bäckstrand, Karin, ‘Democratizing global environmental governance? Stakeholder democracy after the world summit on sustainable development’, European Journal of International Relations, 12:4 (2006), pp. 467–498 Google Scholar; Steffek and Nanz, ‘Emergent patterns of civil society participation in global and European governance’.

16 Bexell, Magdalena and Mörth, Ulrika (eds), Democracy and Public-Private Partnerships in Global Governance (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2010)Google Scholar.

17 O’Brien, Robert, Goetz, Anne M., Scholte, Jan A., and Williams, Marc, Contesting Global Governance: Multilateral Economic Institutions and Global Social Movements (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Smith, Jackie, Social Movements for Global Democracy (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2008)Google Scholar.

18 Saward, Michael, The Representative Claim (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010)Google Scholar; Saward, Michael, ‘Slow theory: Taking time over transnational democratic representation’, Ethics & Global Politics, 4:1 (2011), pp. 1–18 Google Scholar; Montanaro, Laura, ‘The democratic legitimacy of self-appointed representatives’, Journal of Politics, 74:4 (2012), pp. 1094–1107 Google Scholar.

19 Luskin, Robert C., ‘Explaining political sophistication’, Political Behavior, 12:4 (1990), pp. 331–361 Google Scholar.

20 Luskin, ‘Explaining political sophistication’.

21 Delli Carpini, and Keeter, What Americans Know about Politics and Why it Matters.

22 For a similar argument, see Converse, Philip E., ‘Assessing the capacity of mass electorates’, Annual Review of Political Science, 3:1 (2000), p. 332 Google Scholar; Highton, , ‘Revisiting the relationship between educational attainment and political sophistication’, p. 1564 Google Scholar.

23 Zaller, John, The Nature and Origins of Mass Opinion (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1992)Google Scholar, ch. 2, ch. 3, pp. 333ff; Gabel, Matthew and Scheve, Kenneth, ‘Estimating the effect of elite communications on public opinion using instrumental variables’, American Journal of Political Science, 51:4 (2007), pp. 1019 Google Scholar.

24 Luskin, ‘Explaining political sophistication’; Neuman, W. Russell, The Paradox of Mass Politics: Knowledge and Opinion in the American Electorate (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1986)Google Scholar; Delli Carpini and Keeter, What Americans Know about Politics and Why it Matters, ch. 4; Mondak, Jeffery, ‘Reconsidering the measurement of political knowledge’, Political Analysis, 8:1 (1999), pp. 57–82 Google Scholar; Converse, ‘Assessing the capacity of mass electorates’, p. 333; Highton, , ‘Revisiting the relationship between educational attainment and political sophistication’, p. 1568 Google Scholar.

25 Hurd, Ian, After Anarchy: Legitimacy and Power in the United Nations Security Council (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2007)Google Scholar; Cronin, Bruce and Hurd, Ian (eds), The UN Security Council and the Politics of International Authority (New York: Routledge, 2008), p. 12 Google Scholar.

26 Hurd, After Anarchy, p. 5.

27 See, for example, Frederking, Brian, The United States and the Security Council: Collective Security Since the Cold War (New York: Routledge, 2007)Google Scholar; Hurd, After Anarchy; Cronin and Hurd, The UN Security Council and the Politics of International Authority.

28 The survey data were collected through face-to-face interviews between October and December 2000. The sampling strategies aimed at generating nationally representative samples in Asian and European countries (see fn. 62 for a list of these countries). Sampling strategies varied across some of the countries. In most countries, multistratified random cluster samples with different types of stratification were drawn, while in two countries (France and the United Kingdom (UK)), quota samples were used. See, for a detailed field report and list of survey questions, Takashi Inoguchi, ‘Asia Europe Survey (ASES): A Multinational Comparative Study in 18 Countries 2001: ICPSR22324-v1’ (2001), available at: {http://www.asiaeuropesurvey.org} and {http://www.icpsr.umich.edu/icpsrweb/ICPSR/studies/22324}.

29 Kwak, Cf. Nojn, ‘Revisiting the knowledge gap hypothesis: Education, motivation and media use’, Communication Research, 26:4 (1999), pp. 385–413 Google Scholar.

30 Delli Carpini and Keeter, What Americans Know about Politics and Why it Matters; Mondak, ‘Reconsidering the measurement of political knowledge’.

31 See, for an overview, Visser, Penny S., Holbrook, Allyson L., and Krosnick, Jon A., ‘Knowledge and attitudes’, in Wolfgang Donsbach and Michael W. Traugott (eds), Handbook of Public Opinion Research (Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 2008), pp. 127–140 Google Scholar.

32 Boninger, David S., Krosnick, Jon A., and Berent, Matthew K., ‘Origins of attitude importance: Self-interest, social identification, and value relevance’, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68:1 (1995), p. 62 Google Scholar.

33 Krosnick, Jon A., ‘The role of attitude importance in social evaluation: a study of presidential candidate evaluations, policy preferences, and voting behavior’, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 55:2 (1988), pp. 196–210 Google Scholar; Luskin, ‘Explaining political sophistication’, p. 335; Boninger, David S., Krosnick, Jon A., Berent, Matthew K., and Fabrigar, Leandre R., ‘The causes and consequences of attitude importance’, in Richard E. Petty and Jon A. Krosnick (eds), Attitude Strength: Antecedents and Consequences (Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum, 1995), pp. 159–189 Google Scholar; Prislin, Radmila, ‘Attitude stability and attitude strength: One is enough to make it stable’, European Journal of Social Psychology, 26:3 (1996), pp. 447–477 3.0.CO;2-I>CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Holbrook, Allyson L., Berent, Matthew K., Krosnick, Jon A., Visser, Penny S., and Boninger, David S., ‘Attitude importance and the accumulation of attitude-relevant knowledge in memory’, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88:5 (2005), pp. 749–769 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed.

34 Scheve, Kenneth F. and Slaughter, Matthew J., ‘What determines individual trade policy preferences?’, Journal of International Economics, 54:2 (2001), pp. 267–292 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Vreeland, James, The IMF and Economic Development (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Dellmuth and Tallberg, ‘The social legitimacy of international organisations’; Mansfield and Mutz, ‘Support for free trade’.

35 Cf. Boninger, Krosnick, and Berent, ‘Origins of attitude importance’; Holbrook, Berent, Krosnick, Visser, and Boninger, ‘Attitude importance and the accumulation of attitude-relevant knowledge in memory’; Visser, Holbrook, and Krosnick, ‘Knowledge and attitudes’, pp. 130–1.

36 Downs, Anthony, An Economic Theory of Democracy (New York: Addison Wesley, 1957), pp. 160–172 Google Scholar.

37 See, for example, Luskin, ‘Explaining political sophistication’; Althaus, Scott L., ‘Information effects in collective preferences’, American Political Science Review, 92:3 (1998), pp. 545–558 Google Scholar; see, for an overview, Visser, Holbrook, and Krosnick, ‘Knowledge and attitudes’, pp. 130–1.

38 Cf. Downs, An Economic Theory of Democracy; Verba, Schlozman, and Brady, Voice and Equality.

39 Even in the EU, where European political institutions have sought to strengthen a common identity, segmented national public spheres remain. See Koopmans, Ruud and Statham, Paul (eds), The Making of a European Public Sphere: Media Discourse and Political Contention (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010)Google Scholar; Risse, Thomas, A Community of Europeans? Transnational Identities and Public Spheres (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 2010)Google Scholar.

40 de Vreese, Cf. Claes H., Framing Europe: Television News and European Integration (Amsterdam: Aksant Academic Publishers, 2002)Google Scholar; Anderson, Peter J. and McLeod, Aileen, ‘The great non-communicator? The mass communication deficit of the European parliament and its press directorate’, Journal of Common Market Studies, 42:5 (2004), pp. 897–917 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

41 Schattschneider, Elmer E., The Semisovereign People: A Realists View of Democracy in America (New York: Holt, Reinhart, and Winston, 1960), p. 106 Google Scholar; Verba, Schlozman, and Brady, Voice and Equality; Solt, Frederick, ‘Economic inequality and democratic political engagement’, American Journal of Political Science, 52:1 (2008), pp. 48–60 Google Scholar.

42 Dahl, Robert A., Who Governs? Democracy and Power in an American City (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1961), p. 92 Google Scholar.

43 Lukes, Power, p. 28.

44 Cf. Solt, ‘Economic inequality and democratic political engagement’.

45 Lukes, Cf. Steven, Power: A Radical View (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2005), pp. 27–28 Google Scholar.

46 Cf. Solt, ‘Economic inequality and dmocratic political engagement’.

47 Garuda, Gopal, ‘The distributional effects of IMF programs: a cross-country analysis’, World Development, 28:6 (2000), pp. 1031–1051 Google Scholar; Vreeland, James R., ‘The effect of IMF programs on labor’, World Development, 30:1 (2002), pp. 121–139 Google Scholar; Vreeland, James R., The IMF and Economic Development (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2003)Google Scholar.

48 Nooruddin, Irfan and Vreeland, James R., ‘The effect of IMF programs on wages and salaries’, in Jennifer Clapp and Rorden Wilkinson (eds), Global Governance, Poverty, and Inequality (London: Routledge, 2010), pp. 90–111 Google Scholar.

49 Omotunde Johnson and Joanne Salop, ‘Distributional Aspects of Stabilization Programs in Developing Countries’, IMF Staff Papers, 27 (1980), p. 12.

50 Cooley, Alexander and Ron, James, ‘The NGO scramble: Organizational insecurity and the political economy of transnational action’, International Security, 27:1 (2002), pp. 5–39 Google Scholar; Kelly, Robert E., ‘Assessing the impact of NGOs on intergovernmental organizations: the case of the Bretton Woods institutions’, International Political Science Review, 32:3 (2011), pp. 323–344 Google Scholar.

51 Schattschneider, The Semisovereign People; Ansolabehere, Stephen, de Figueiredo, John M., and Snyder, James M. Jr, ‘Why is there so little money in U.S. politics?’, Journal of Economic Perspectives, 17:1 (2003), pp. 105–130 Google Scholar; Dahl, Robert A., On Political Equality (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2006), pp. 85–86 Google Scholar; Solt, ‘Economic inequality and democratic political engagement’.

52 Cf. Verba, Schlozman, and Brady, Voice and Equality.

53 Solt, ‘Economic inequality and democratic political engagement’.

54 Hooghe, Cf. Liesbet and Marks, Gary, ‘Calculation, community, and cues: Public opinion on European integration’, European Union Politics, 6:4 (2005), pp. 419–443 Google Scholar.

55 See, for example, Norris, ‘Global governance and cosmopolitan citizens’; Norris, ‘Confidence in the United Nations’; Dellmuth and Tallberg, ‘The social legitimacy of international organisations’.

56 Furia, Peter A., ‘Global citizenship, anyone? Cosmopolitanism, privilege and public opinion’, Global Society, 19:4 (2005), pp. 331–359 Google Scholar; Mau, Mewes, and Zimmermann, ‘Cosmopolitan attitudes through transnational practices’.

57 Norris, Pippa and Inglehart, Ronald, Cosmopolitan Communications: Cultural Diversity in a Globalized World (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009), p. 182 Google Scholar. The notion of values is evasive and definitions differ across disciplines in the social sciences. I refer to values as relatively stable ‘beliefs about ideal modes of conduct and ideal terminal goals’. See Rokeach, Milton, Beliefs, Attitudes, and Values (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1968), p. 124 Google Scholar. An internalised value becomes a standard or criterion for developing and maintaining attitudes toward or identification with objects. See Rokeach, Beliefs, Attitudes, and Values, p. 160.

58 Inglehart, Cf. Ronald, ‘Cognitive mobilization and European identity’, Comparative Politics, 3:1 (1970), pp. 45–70 Google Scholar; Fordham, Benjamin O. and Kleinberg, Katja B., ‘How can economic interests influence support for free trade?’, International Organization, 66:2 (2012), pp. 311–328 Google Scholar; Norris and Inglehart, Cosmopolitan Communications, ch. 6; Chalmers, Adam W. and Dellmuth, Lisa M., ‘Fiscal redistribution and public support for European integration’, European Union Politics, 16:3 (2015), pp. 386–407 Google Scholar.

59 Mau, Mewes, and Zimmermann, ‘Cosmopolitan attitudes through transnational practices’; Norris and Inglehart, Cosmopolitan Communications, ch. 6.

60 Jan Teorell, Nicholas Charron, Stefan Dahlberg, Sören Holmberg, Bo Rothstein, Petrus Sundin, and Richard Svensson, ‘The Quality of Government Basic Dataset Made From the Quality of Government Dataset Version 15May13’ (2011), available at: {http://www.qog.pol.gu.se}.

61 The ASES covers 18 countries, but China drops out of the analyses since not all survey questions have been asked in this country. The analyses include France, Germany, Greece, Indonesia, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Malaysia, Philippines, Portugal, Singapore, South Korea, Spain, Sweden, Taiwan, Thailand, and the UK.

62 Converse, Philip E., ‘Information flow and the stability of partisan attitudes’, Public Opinion Quarterly, 26 (1962), pp. 578–599 Google Scholar; Converse, Philip E., ‘Change in the American electorate’, in Angus Campbell and Philip E. Converse (eds), The Human Meaning of Social Change (New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 1972), pp. 263–337 Google Scholar.

63 Luskin, ‘Explaining political sophistication’; Neuman, The Paradox of Mass Politics; Zaller, The Nature and Origins of Mass Opinion; Delli Carpini and Keeter, What Americans Know about Politics and Why it Matters, ch. 4; Mondak, ‘Reconsidering the measurement of political knowledge’.

64 Zaller, The Nature and Origins of Mass Opinion, ch. 2, ch. 3, and pp. 333ff.

65 Ibid., p. 43.

66 Appendix A gives an overview of the wording of the survey questions.

67 Summary statistics for and correlations between the variables are reported in Tables B1 and B2 in Appendix B.

68 Converse, ‘Assessing the capacity of mass electorates’, p. 333. See also Neuman, The Paradox of Mass Politics, and Delli Carpini and Keeter, What Americans Know about Politics and Why it Matters, ch. 4.

69 The time period considered here ranges from the mid-1990s until 2000. See United Nations Security Council, ‘Security Council Resolutions’ (2014), available at: {http://www.un.org/en/sc/documents/resolutions/}.

70 See also Solt, ‘Economic inequality and democratic political engagement’. The calculation of this measure is based on the assumption that the data are representative for the broader populations of the 17 countries, as the accuracy of the measure would be distorted in the case of an over- or under-representation of specific income groups in the survey data. However, sampling in all countries aimed at nationally representative samples. Only in two countries, the fieldwork relied on quota samples instead of random samples (see fn. 25), increasing our confidence in that the assumption is warranted.

71 Solt, ‘Economic inequality and democratic political engagement’. This variable is made available for 2001 by Teorell, Charron, Dahlberg, Holmberg, Rothstein, Sundin, and Svensson, ‘The Quality of Government Basic Dataset Made From The Quality of Government Dataset Version 15May13’.

72 Dolan, Kathleen, ‘Do women and men know different things? Measuring gender differences in political knowledge’, Journal of Politics, 73:1 (2011), pp. 97–107 Google Scholar.

73 Althaus, Scott L., Collective Preferences in Democratic Politics: Opinion Surveys and the Will of the People (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2003)Google Scholar.

74 Luskin, ‘Explaining political sophistication’.

75 Cf. Holbrook, Berent, Krosnick, Visser, and Boninger, ‘Attitude importance and the accumulation of attitude-relevant knowledge in memory’.

76 Highton, ‘Revisiting the relationship between educational attainment and political sophistication’.

77 Solt, ‘Economic inequality and democratic political engagement’.

78 Johnson, Joel W. and Wallack, Jessica S., Electoral Systems and the Personal Vote: Update of Database from Particularism Around the World (San Diego: University of California, 2006)Google Scholar.

79 Blais, André and Carty, Kenneth K., ‘Does proportional representation foster voter turnout?’, European Journal of Political Research, 18:2 (1990), pp. 167–182 Google Scholar.

80 Hadenius, Axel, Teorell, Jan, and Wahman, Michael, Authoritarian Regimes Data Set, Version 3.0 (Lund: Department of Political Science, Lund University, 2012)Google Scholar.

81 Lijphart, Arendt, Patterns of Democracy: Government Forms and Performance in Thirty-Six Countries (New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 1999)Google Scholar; Solt, ‘Economic inequality and democratic political engagement’.

82 Both measures are derived from Gerring, John, Thacker, Strom C., and Moreno, Carola, ‘Centripetal democratic governance: a theory and global inquiry’, American Political Science Review, 99:4 (2005), pp. 567–581 Google Scholar.

83 Using this model requires testing whether the covariate effects are constant across categories. A test of this assumption suggests that this assumption is reasonable given the data at hand. See Sophia Rabe-Hesketh and Anders Skrondal, Multilevel and Longitudinal Modeling Using Stata (Texas: Stata Press, 2008).

84 The intra-class correlation, which reveals how much of the total variation in knowledge lies at the country level, is estimated according to the following equation (cf. Rabe-Hesketh and Skrondal, Multilevel and Longitudinal Modeling Using Stata): ρ=Var(ζ1j )/(Var(ζ1j )+π2/3)=0.22/(0.22+π2/3)=0.05.

85 Note that the Variance Inflation Factor is less than 2, indicating that multicollinearity should not inflate the coefficient estimates (see Fox, John and Monette, Georges, ‘Generalized collinearity diagnostics’, Journal of the American Statistical Association, 87:417 (1992), pp. 178–183 Google Scholar).

86 Berry, Cf. William D., DeMeritt, Jacqueline H. R., and Esarey, Justin, ‘Testing for interaction in binary logit and probit models: Is a product term essential?’, American Journal of Political Science, 54:1 (2010), pp. 248–266 Google Scholar. The response probabilities for Figure 2 are calculated following Wooldridge, Jeffrey M., Econometric Analysis of Cross Section and Panel Data (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2001), p. 505 Google Scholar, equation 15.88. Probabilities are implemented in Stata by extending the code by Brambor, Thomas, Clark, William R., and Golder, Matt, ‘Understanding interaction models: Improving empirical analyses’, Political Analysis, 14:1 (2006), pp. 63–82 Google Scholar.

87 Cf. Ansolabehere, de Figueiredo, and Snyder Jr., ‘Why is there so little money in U.S. politics?’; Solt, ‘Economic inequality and democratic political engagement’.

88 Cf. Schattschneider, The Semisovereign People, pp. 105–7; Dahl, On Political Equality, ch. 7.

89 Norris, ‘Global governance and cosmopolitan citizens’; Norris, ‘Confidence in the United Nations’.

90 Delli Carpini and Keeter, What Americans Know about Politics and Why it Matters.

91 Cf. Dolan, ‘Do women and men know different things?’

92 Cf. Delli Carpini and Keeter, What Americans Know about Politics and Why it Matters; Highton, ‘Revisiting the relationship between educational attainment and political sophistication’.

93 Johnson and Wallack, Electoral Systems and the Personal Vote.

94 Solt, ‘Economic inequality and democratic political engagement’.

95 Lijphart, Patterns of Democracy; Solt, ‘Economic inequality and democratic political engagement’.

96 Tweksbury, Cf. David, Weaver, Andrew J., and Maddex, Brett D., ‘Accidentally informed: Incidental news exposure on the World Wide Web’, Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, 78:3 (2001), pp. 533–554 Google Scholar.

97 See, for a similar coding, Dellmuth and Tallberg, ‘The social legitimacy of international organisations’.

98 United Nations Security Council, ‘Security Council Resolutions’.

99 See, for example, Delli Carpini and Keeter, What Americans Know about Politics and Why it Matters; Highton, ‘Revisiting the relationship between educational attainment and political sophistication’; Luskin, ‘Explaining political sophistication’.

100 See, for example, Johnson and Wallack, Electoral Systems and the Personal Vote.

101 See, for example, Solt, ‘Economic inequality and democratic political engagement’.

102 See, for example, Mau, Mewes, and Zimmermann, ‘Cosmopolitan attitudes through transnational practices’; Norris and Inglehart, Cosmopolitan Communications, ch. 6.

103 Feldman, Stanley, ‘Structure and consistency in public opinion: the role of core beliefs and values’, American Journal of Political Science, 32:2 (1987), pp. 416–440 Google Scholar; Hurwitz, Jon and Peffley, Mark, ‘How are foreign policy attitudes structured? A hierarchical model’, American Political Science Review, 81:4 (1987), pp. 1099–1120 Google Scholar; Brewer, Paul R. and Gross, Kimberley, ‘Values, framing, and citizens’ thoughts about policy issues: Effects on content and quantity’, Political Psychology, 26:6 (2005), pp. 929–948 Google Scholar.

104 To this end, we need better survey data on citizen awareness of IOs, preferably in the form of multi-item knowledge measures that result in more valid representations of what people know about IOs. See Mondak, ‘Reconsidering the measurement of political knowledge’.

105 Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, ‘Divided We Stand: Why Income Inequality Keeps Rising’ (2011), available at: {http://www.oecd.org/social/soc/49499779.pdf}.