What Motivates Moderation? Policy Shifts of Ruling Parties, Opposition Parties and Niche Parties

REFERENCES

• Adams, James and Samuel Merrill, III. 2006. Why small, centrist third parties motivate policy divergence by major parties. American Political Science Review 100 (3): 403–17. doi: 10.1017/S0003055406062265
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Adams, James and Zeynep Somer-Topcu. 2009. Policy adjustment by parties in response to rival parties policy shifts: spatial theory and the dynamics of party competition in twenty-five post-war democracies. British Journal of Political Science 39 (4): 825–46. doi: 10.1017/S0007123409000635
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Adams, James, Michael Clark, Lawrence Ezrow and Garrett Glasgow. 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): 586–610. doi: 10.1017/S0007123404000201
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Adams, James, Michael Clark, Lawrence Ezrow and Garrett Glasgow. 2006. Are niche parties fundamentally different from mainstream parties? The causes and the electoral consequences of Western European parties’ policy shifts, 1976–1998. American Journal of Political Science 50 (3): 513–29. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-5907.2006.00199.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Adams, James, Andrea B. Haupt and Heather Stoll. 2009. What moves parties? The role of public opinion and global economic conditions in Western Europe. Comparative Political Studies 42 (5): 611–39. doi: 10.1177/0010414008328637
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Adams, James, Lawrence Ezrow and Debra Leiter. 2012. Partisan sorting and niche parties in Europe. West European Politics 35 (6): 1272–94. doi: 10.1080/01402382.2012.713746
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aldrich, John H. 1983. A Downsian spatial model with party activism. American Political Science Review 77 (4): 974–99. doi: 10.2307/1957570
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bawn, Kathleen and Zeynep Somer-Topcu. 2012. Government versus opposition at the polls: how governing status affects the impact of policy positions. American Journal of Political Science 56 (2): 433–46. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-5907.2011.00563.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Budge, Ian. 1994. A new spatial theory of party competition: uncertainty, ideology and policy equilibria viewed comparatively and temporally. British Journal of Political Science 24 (October): 443–67. doi: 10.1017/S0007123400006955
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Budge, Ian, Hans-Dieter Klingemann, Andrea Volkens, Judith Bara and Eric Tanenbaum. 2001. Mapping Policy Preferences: Estimates for Parties, Electors, and Governments, 1945–1998. New York: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Cox, Gary W. 1990. Centripetal and centrifugal incentives in electoral systems. American Journal of Political Science 30 (4): 903–35. doi: 10.2307/2111465
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dahl, Robert. (ed). 1966. Political Oppositions in Western Democracies. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Dow, Jay K. 2001. A comparative spatial analysis of majoritarian and proportional elections. Electoral Studies 20 (1): 109–25. doi: 10.1016/S0261-3794(99)00041-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Downs, Anthony. 1957. An Economic Theory of Democracy. New York: Harper and Brothers.
   Google Scholar
• Enelow, James M. and Melvin J. Hinich. 1984. The Spatial Theory of Voting. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ezrow, Lawrence. 2008. Parties’ policy programmes and the dog that didn’t bark: no evidence that proportional systems promote extreme party positioning. British Journal of Political Science 38 (3): 479–97. doi: 10.1017/S0007123408000240
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ezrow, Lawrence, Catherine E. De Vries, Marco Steenbergen and Erica Edwards. 2011. Mean voter representation and partisan constituency representation: do parties respond to the mean voter position or to their supporters? Party Politics 17 (3): 275–301. doi: 10.1177/1354068810372100
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Huber, John. 1989. Values and partisanship in left-right orientations: measuring ideology. European Journal of Political Research 17 (5): 599–621. doi: 10.1111/j.1475-6765.1989.tb00209.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Katz, Richard S. and Peter Mair. 1995. Changing models of party organization and party democracy: the emergence of the cartel party. Party Politics 1 (1): 5–28. doi: 10.1177/1354068895001001001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Katz, Richard S. and Peter Mair. 2009. The cartel party thesis: a restatement. Perspectives on Politics 7 (4): 753–66. doi: 10.1017/S1537592709991782
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Klingemann, Hans-Dieter, Andrea Volkens, Judith Bara, Ian Budge and Michael McDonald. 2007. Mapping Policy Preferences II: Estimates for Parties, Electors and Governments in Central and Eastern Europe, European Union and OECD 1990–2003. New York: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Laver, Michael and Norman Schofield. 1998. Multiparty Government: The Politics of Coalition in Europe. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lehrer, Ron. 2012. Intra-party democracy and party responsiveness. West European Politics 35 (6): 1295–319. doi: 10.1080/01402382.2012.713747
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maeda, Ko. 2012. An irrational party of rational members: the collision of legislators’ re-election quest with party success in the Japan socialist party. Comparative Political Studies 45 (3): 341–65. doi: 10.1177/0010414011421312
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mair, Peter. 1997. Party System Change: Approaches and Interpretations. New York: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Meguid, Bonnie M. 2005. Competition between unequals: the role of mainstream party strategy in niche party success. American Political Science Review 99 (3): 347–59. doi: 10.1017/S0003055405051701
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Miller, Gary and Norman Schofield. 2003. Activists and partisan realignment in the United States. American Political Science Review 97 (2): 245–60. doi: 10.1017/S0003055403000650
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Müller, Wolfgang C. and Kaare Strøm. (eds). 1999. Policy, Office, or Votes?: How Political Parties in Western Europe Make Hard Decisions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Robertson, David. 1976. A Theory of Party Competition. New York: John Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• Sartori, Giovanni. 1976. Parties and Party Systems: A Framework for Analysis. New York: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Schmitt, Hermann and Evi Scholz. 2005. The Mannheim Eurobarometer Trend File, 1970–2002. Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research.
   Google Scholar
• Schumacher, Gijs, Catherine E. de Vries and Barbara Vis. 2013. Why do parties change position? Party organization and environmental incentives. Journal of Politics 75 (2): 464–77. doi: 10.1017/S0022381613000145
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Somer-Topcu, Zeynep. 2009. Timely decisions: the effects of past national elections on party policy change. Journal of Politics 71 (1): 238–48. doi: 10.1017/S0022381608090154
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wilson, James Q. 1973. Political Organizations. New York: Basic Books.
   Google Scholar