.png){kind=icon}
返回
Systemic polarisation and spatial voting
.png){kind=icon}
PRE
AI
DOI：10.1111/j.1475-6765.2010.01918.x.png)
.png){kind=icon}
原文求助.png){kind=icon}
分享.png){kind=icon}
收藏
摘要
En 中文
The controversy between proximity and directional models of issue voting has not been settled. Instead of appointing an ultimate winner, this article explores the conditioning impact of the level of systemic polarisation and provides evidence that proximity is a more relevant determinant of voter behaviour in less polarised systems, whereas there is a centrifugal and directional dynamic in more polarised contexts. By so doing, the article shows how a largely forgotten notion - namely Sartori's idea of the spatial elasticity of the political spectrum - leads to different spatial viewpoints. In distinguishing between party (supply side) and voter (demand side) polarisation, this framework provides a comprehensive picture about the conditions that turn a centripetal electoral dynamic into a purely centrifugal one.
Keyword:
ANTI-IMMIGRANT PARTIES
PROXIMITY
ELECTIONS
MODELS
REPRESENTATION
PREFERENCES
BEHAVIOR
PROTEST
ISSUES
AI总结
对已上传原文的论文进行重点信息的提取，主要内容包括：简要概述、研究摘要、背景介绍、关键亮点、图文解析、展望与总结。
期刊
IF:
4.2
论文数:
2.3K
被引数:
6.0K
机构
引用论文
分享收藏On attempting to rehabilitate the proximity model: Sometimes the patient just can't be helped.png)
JOURNAL OF POLITICS
JOURNAL OF POLITICSIF3.8
PREAI
分享收藏
查看更多内容