Summary Literature – Political Attitudes and
Behaviour in Context
1.1 Hadjar, A., & Beck, M. (2010). Who Does Not Participate in
Elections in Europe and Why Is This? A Multilevel Analysis of
Social Mechanisms behind Non-Voting. European Societies,
12(4), pp. 521-542.
I. Introduction
Voter turnout on decline in democracies social problem lack of voting signifies lack of
democratic representation decrease legitimacy of elected government decrease degree of
acceptance of governmental decisions.
RQ: Who are the non-voters, what characterises them and how can voter turnout be increased in
Europe?
Looking at individual characteristics of non-voters & aspects of electoral systems in Europe.
II. Determinants of Non-Voting
This article: focus on motivational factors (political efficacy, interest, trust, satisfaction) &
sociodemographic factors (education, cohort, gender).
Individual Level Factors
1. Cohort: generation that is characterised by certain educational level & shared socialisation
experiences common general world view.
Post-materialism theory: value change voting no longer adequate means to deal with
issues more distant from traditional political institutions cannot be mobilised non-
voting & unconventional forms of political participation.
Age effect: political orientations & behaviour develop & increase during lifelong socialisation
process. Political attachments & interests increase over life cycle voter turnout rises with
age. Lifecycle theory: political concerns mature with age more likely to vote & deal with
politics.
2. Education: understood in terms of cognitive abilities. Also: indicator of social position & status.
High education improvement of participation, shape opportunities & political
competences. Characterised by more advanced competences in recognising, understanding
& reflecting on political issues easier access to politics & political issues.
Education determinant of moral development & responsibility higher educated stronger
sense of civic duty to participate in elections & socialised in environment that supports civic
norms of political participation/democracy. Voting habit.
Education not same for all cohorts. Changing composition of educational groups might close gap
between higher educated & less educated in political attitudes & behaviour. Influx of working class
into higher education heterogenization voting behaviour of higher educated more similar to
that of lower educated.
3. Gender: women expected to be non-voters more often than men.
4. Political Efficacy: the degree to which person believes in own ability to understand politics &
individual political action does have influence on political processes. Lack of efficacy non-voter.
Internal efficacy: individual competences, skills & resources to deal with politics.
, External efficacy: individual perception that political institutions are responsive to one’s
attempt to exert political influence.
5. Political Interest: degree to which politics arouses citizens’ curiosity. Linked to political behaviour.
Interest involvement political activities more likely to vote.
6. Trust: trust in countries political system is part of individual’s evaluation of political system on
whether political objects are performing in accordance with normative expectations of public. Trust
confident that political system is responding to their voting behaviour vote.
7. Satisfaction with political institutions & politicians: highly satisfied with government & political
system voting as ‘civic duty’ less likely non-voter.
The probability of non-voting …
… is higher among younger – later-born – cohorts (H1).
… increases with a lower educational level (H2a).
… increases more strongly over cohort succession among tertiary-educated; therefore the distinction
of the tertiary-educated people in their higher voting level decreases over time (H2b).
… is higher among women than among men (H3).
… decreases with a higher political efficacy (H4).
… decreases with a higher political interest (H5).
… decreases with a higher political trust (H6).
… decreases with a higher political satisfaction (H7).
Societal Level Factors
1. Compulsory voting: increases voter turnout by enforcement or internalisation.
2. Disproportionality factor: shape of disproportionality of electoral system determines actual &
perceived impact of vote. High disproportionality non-voting. Also influences political efficacy.
3. Maturity of democracy: democratic experience stimulation of political learning process
political efficacy voting.
4. Forms of direct democracy (referendum): participation opportunities. Direct democracies
educative effect enhanced civic engagement, more political trust & mobilisation of
parties/interest groups increase voter turnout.
The probability of non-voting …
… is higher in ‘young democracies’ with a short democratic experience (H8).
… is lower in countries with a compulsory voting law (H9).
… is lower in countries where elements of direct democratic participation are frequently used (H10)
… increases with an increasing disproportionality factor (H11).
,
, 1.2 Van der Meer, T., & Hakhverdian, A. (2017). Political Trust
as the Evaluation of Process and Performance: A Cross-National
Study of 42 European Countries. Political Studies, 65(1), pp. 81-
102.
Introduction
Trust in democratic political institutions important facet of legitimacy. Also: degree of scepticism
beneficial seeking evidence to (dis)trust motivates to involve in politics. Diffuse vs. specific
support trust in regime, scepticism in governing institutions/actors.
RQ: Do citizens retroactively judge the quality of the macroeconomic outcomes or democratic
procedures? And if so, do citizens decide to grant/withhold trust based on cross-sectional evidence
on how well one’s own country is performing compared to other countries?
Debated whether political trust is based on actual policy performance & actual procedures.
This article: examining evaluative nature of political trust 1) test to what extent performance
(economically) & process (corruption) feature in citizens’ trust-calculus, 2) taking (cognitive/moral)
heterogeneity of population into account (individuals different criteria for evaluation).
Theory
The Nature of Trust
Trust: subjective evaluation of relationship between subject & object – A trusts B to do x. Relational
nature look for explanations of trust in characteristics of subject (citizen), object (institution) &
their interaction.
Rational: evaluated by own merits. Trust as rational implies that objects meets requirements
of being:
o Competent: perform according to expectations.
o Caring: intrinsically committed.
o Accountable: extrinsically committed due to encapsulated interest.
o Predictable: consistent.
Economic Performance
Trust evaluative good performance in terms of substantive policy outcomes higher trust.
Mostly focus on macro-economic performance, seems to have most impact. However: based on
(individual/aggregate) subjective evaluations of economy rather than objective performance
contested whether objective evaluations influence trust.
This article: considering six economic indicators & how they relate to trust: economic development
(+), growth (+), inflation (-), unemployment (-), budget deficits (-) & income inequality (-).
Democratic Processes
Democratic process accounts go beyond discontent with particular decisions/outcomes, tap more
deep-rooted perceptions about how democracy works. Trust evaluation higher trust in context
of institutional quality.
This article: focus on corruption. Undermines efficiency & effectiveness of national politics lack of
accountability/responsiveness less trust.
Who Cares About Performance?
Behaviour in Context
1.1 Hadjar, A., & Beck, M. (2010). Who Does Not Participate in
Elections in Europe and Why Is This? A Multilevel Analysis of
Social Mechanisms behind Non-Voting. European Societies,
12(4), pp. 521-542.
I. Introduction
Voter turnout on decline in democracies social problem lack of voting signifies lack of
democratic representation decrease legitimacy of elected government decrease degree of
acceptance of governmental decisions.
RQ: Who are the non-voters, what characterises them and how can voter turnout be increased in
Europe?
Looking at individual characteristics of non-voters & aspects of electoral systems in Europe.
II. Determinants of Non-Voting
This article: focus on motivational factors (political efficacy, interest, trust, satisfaction) &
sociodemographic factors (education, cohort, gender).
Individual Level Factors
1. Cohort: generation that is characterised by certain educational level & shared socialisation
experiences common general world view.
Post-materialism theory: value change voting no longer adequate means to deal with
issues more distant from traditional political institutions cannot be mobilised non-
voting & unconventional forms of political participation.
Age effect: political orientations & behaviour develop & increase during lifelong socialisation
process. Political attachments & interests increase over life cycle voter turnout rises with
age. Lifecycle theory: political concerns mature with age more likely to vote & deal with
politics.
2. Education: understood in terms of cognitive abilities. Also: indicator of social position & status.
High education improvement of participation, shape opportunities & political
competences. Characterised by more advanced competences in recognising, understanding
& reflecting on political issues easier access to politics & political issues.
Education determinant of moral development & responsibility higher educated stronger
sense of civic duty to participate in elections & socialised in environment that supports civic
norms of political participation/democracy. Voting habit.
Education not same for all cohorts. Changing composition of educational groups might close gap
between higher educated & less educated in political attitudes & behaviour. Influx of working class
into higher education heterogenization voting behaviour of higher educated more similar to
that of lower educated.
3. Gender: women expected to be non-voters more often than men.
4. Political Efficacy: the degree to which person believes in own ability to understand politics &
individual political action does have influence on political processes. Lack of efficacy non-voter.
Internal efficacy: individual competences, skills & resources to deal with politics.
, External efficacy: individual perception that political institutions are responsive to one’s
attempt to exert political influence.
5. Political Interest: degree to which politics arouses citizens’ curiosity. Linked to political behaviour.
Interest involvement political activities more likely to vote.
6. Trust: trust in countries political system is part of individual’s evaluation of political system on
whether political objects are performing in accordance with normative expectations of public. Trust
confident that political system is responding to their voting behaviour vote.
7. Satisfaction with political institutions & politicians: highly satisfied with government & political
system voting as ‘civic duty’ less likely non-voter.
The probability of non-voting …
… is higher among younger – later-born – cohorts (H1).
… increases with a lower educational level (H2a).
… increases more strongly over cohort succession among tertiary-educated; therefore the distinction
of the tertiary-educated people in their higher voting level decreases over time (H2b).
… is higher among women than among men (H3).
… decreases with a higher political efficacy (H4).
… decreases with a higher political interest (H5).
… decreases with a higher political trust (H6).
… decreases with a higher political satisfaction (H7).
Societal Level Factors
1. Compulsory voting: increases voter turnout by enforcement or internalisation.
2. Disproportionality factor: shape of disproportionality of electoral system determines actual &
perceived impact of vote. High disproportionality non-voting. Also influences political efficacy.
3. Maturity of democracy: democratic experience stimulation of political learning process
political efficacy voting.
4. Forms of direct democracy (referendum): participation opportunities. Direct democracies
educative effect enhanced civic engagement, more political trust & mobilisation of
parties/interest groups increase voter turnout.
The probability of non-voting …
… is higher in ‘young democracies’ with a short democratic experience (H8).
… is lower in countries with a compulsory voting law (H9).
… is lower in countries where elements of direct democratic participation are frequently used (H10)
… increases with an increasing disproportionality factor (H11).
,
, 1.2 Van der Meer, T., & Hakhverdian, A. (2017). Political Trust
as the Evaluation of Process and Performance: A Cross-National
Study of 42 European Countries. Political Studies, 65(1), pp. 81-
102.
Introduction
Trust in democratic political institutions important facet of legitimacy. Also: degree of scepticism
beneficial seeking evidence to (dis)trust motivates to involve in politics. Diffuse vs. specific
support trust in regime, scepticism in governing institutions/actors.
RQ: Do citizens retroactively judge the quality of the macroeconomic outcomes or democratic
procedures? And if so, do citizens decide to grant/withhold trust based on cross-sectional evidence
on how well one’s own country is performing compared to other countries?
Debated whether political trust is based on actual policy performance & actual procedures.
This article: examining evaluative nature of political trust 1) test to what extent performance
(economically) & process (corruption) feature in citizens’ trust-calculus, 2) taking (cognitive/moral)
heterogeneity of population into account (individuals different criteria for evaluation).
Theory
The Nature of Trust
Trust: subjective evaluation of relationship between subject & object – A trusts B to do x. Relational
nature look for explanations of trust in characteristics of subject (citizen), object (institution) &
their interaction.
Rational: evaluated by own merits. Trust as rational implies that objects meets requirements
of being:
o Competent: perform according to expectations.
o Caring: intrinsically committed.
o Accountable: extrinsically committed due to encapsulated interest.
o Predictable: consistent.
Economic Performance
Trust evaluative good performance in terms of substantive policy outcomes higher trust.
Mostly focus on macro-economic performance, seems to have most impact. However: based on
(individual/aggregate) subjective evaluations of economy rather than objective performance
contested whether objective evaluations influence trust.
This article: considering six economic indicators & how they relate to trust: economic development
(+), growth (+), inflation (-), unemployment (-), budget deficits (-) & income inequality (-).
Democratic Processes
Democratic process accounts go beyond discontent with particular decisions/outcomes, tap more
deep-rooted perceptions about how democracy works. Trust evaluation higher trust in context
of institutional quality.
This article: focus on corruption. Undermines efficiency & effectiveness of national politics lack of
accountability/responsiveness less trust.
Who Cares About Performance?
