Making Sense of Citizens’ Sense of Being Represented. A Novel Conceptualisation and Measure of Feeling Represented

References

• Akkerman, A., Mudde, C., & Zaslove, A. (2014). How populist are the people? Measuring populist attitudes in voters. Comparative Political Studies, 47(9), 1324–1353.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Almond, G., & Verba, S. (1963). The civic culture. Political attitudes and democracy in five nations. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Blais, A., Singh, S., & Dumitrescu, D. (2014). Political institutions, perceptions of representation, and the turnout decision. In J. Thomassen (Ed.), Elections and representative democracy: Representation and accountability (pp. 99–112). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Burke, E. (1854). Speech to the electors of Bristol at the conclusion of the poll. In The works of the right Honourable Edmund Burke, volume 1 (pp. 446–448). London: Henry G. Bohn.
   Google Scholar
• Castanho Silva, B., Jungkunz, S., Helbling, M., & & Littvay, L. (2020). An empirical comparison of seven populist attitudes scales. Political Research Quarterly, 73(2), 409–424.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chamberlain, A. (2012). A time-series analysis of external efficacy. Public Opinion Quarterly, 76(1), 117–130.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Craig, S. C., Niemi, R. G., & Silver, G. E. (1990). Political efficacy and trust: A report on the NES pilot study items. Political Behavior, 12(3), 289–314.
   Google Scholar
• Disch, L. (2015). The “constructivist turn” in democratic representation: A normative dead-end? Constellations (Oxford, England), 22(4), 487–499.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dovi, S. (2012). The good representative. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons.
   Google Scholar
• Dunn, K. (2015). Voice, representation and trust in parliament. Acta Politica, 50(2), 171–192.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Easton, D. (1965). A systems analysis of political life. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
   Google Scholar
• Esaiasson, P., Kölln, A. K., & Turper, S. (2015). External efficacy and perceived responsiveness—Similar but distinct concepts. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 27(3), 432–445.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eulau, H., & Karps, P. D. (1977). The puzzle of representation: Specifying components of responsiveness. Legislative Studies Quarterly, 2(3), 233–254.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gamson, W. A. (1968). Power and discontent. Homewood, IL: Dorsey.
   Google Scholar
• Giger, N., Kissau, K., Lutz, G., & Rosset, J. (2009). Explaining the variance of subjective and substantive representation. In ECPR General Conference 2009. Potsdam, Germany.
   Google Scholar
• Golder, M., & Stramski, J. (2010). Ideological congruence and electoral institutions. American Journal of Political Science, 54(1), 90–106.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Holmberg, S. (2020). Feeling represented. In R. Rohrschneider & J. Thomassen (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of political representation in liberal democracies (pp. 413–434). New York: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hooghe, M., & Marien, S. (2013). A comparative analysis of the relation between political trust and forms of political participation in Europe. European Societies, 15(1), 131–152.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hosking, G. (2019). The decline of trust in government. In M. Sasaki (Ed.), Trust in contemporary society. Series in comparative social studies (pp. 77–103). Leiden: Brill.
   Google Scholar
• Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1–55.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Inglehart, R., & Norris, P. (2016, August). Trump, Brexit, and the rise of populism: Economic have-nots and cultural backlash (HKS Working Paper No. 26).
   Google Scholar
• Kline, R. B. (2015). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. New York: Guilford Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Kriesi, H., & Schulte-Cloos, J. (2020). Support for radical parties in Western Europe: Structural conflicts and political dynamics. Electoral Studies, 65, 102–138.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lapinski, J., Levendusky, M., Winneg, K., & Jamieson, K. H. (2016). What do citizens want from their member of congress? Political Research Quarterly, 69(3), 535–545.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lavi, L., Treger, C., Rivlin, N., Sheafer, T., Waismel-Manor, I., Shenhav, S., … Shamir, M. (2021, April). The Pitkinian public: Representation in the eyes of citizens. Retrieved from SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3835506.
   Google Scholar
• Lombardo, E., & Meier, P. (2018). Good symbolic representation: The relevance of inclusion. Political Science & Politics, 51(2), 327.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mansbridge, J. (2003). Rethinking representation. American Political Science Review, 97(4), 515–528.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marsh, H. W., Hau, K. T., & Wen, Z. (2004). In search of golden rules: Comment on hypothesis-testing approaches to setting cutoff values for fit indexes and dangers in overgeneralizing Hu and Bentler’s (1999) findings. Structural Equation Modeling, 11(3), 320–341.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Matsunaga, M. (2010). How to factor-analyze your data right: Do’s, don’ts, and How-to’s. International Journal of Psychological Research, 3(1), 97–110.
   Google Scholar
• McDonald, J. (2021). Who cares? Explaining perceptions of compassion in candidates for office. Political Behavior, 43(4), 1371–1394.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Miller, A. H., & Listhaug, O. (1990). Political parties and confidence in government: A comparison of Norway, Sweden and the United States. British Journal of Political Science, 20(3), 357–386.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Minta, M. D. (2009). Legislative oversight and the substantive representation of Black and Latino interests in Congress. Legislative Studies Quarterly, 34(2), 193–218.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mudde, C. (2004). The populist zeitgeist. Government and Opposition, 39(4), 541–563.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Norris, P. (1999). Introduction: The growth of critical citizens? In P. Norris (Ed.), Critical citizens: Global support for democratic government (pp. 1–30). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Peress, M. (2013). Candidate positioning and responsiveness to constituent opinion in the US house of representatives. Public Choice, 156(1-2), 77–94.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pilet, J. B. (2021). Hard times for governing parties: The 2019 federal elections in Belgium. West European Politics, 44(2), 439–449.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pitkin, H. F. (1967). The concept of representation. Berkeley: University of California Press.
   Google Scholar
• Rehfeld, A. (2006). Towards a general theory of political representation. The Journal of Politics, 68(1), 1–21.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Saward, M. (2006). The representative claim. Contemporary Political Theory, 5(3), 297–318.
   Google Scholar
• Saward, M. (2010). The representative claim. New York: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Schreiber, J. B., Nora, A., Stage, F. K., Barlow, E. A., & King, J. (2006). Reporting structural equation modeling and confirmatory factor analysis results: A review. The Journal of Educational Research, 99(6), 323–338.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schulz, A., Müller, P., Schemer, C., Wirz, D. S., Wettstein, M., & Wirth, W. (2018). Measuring populist attitudes on three dimensions. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 30(2), 316–326.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Singh, S., Karakoç, E., & Blais, A. (2012). Differentiating winners: How elections affect satisfaction with democracy. Electoral Studies, 31(1), 201–211.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stimson, J. A., MacKuen, M. B., & Erikson, R. S. (1995). Dynamic representation. American Political Science Review, 89(3), 543–565.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thomassen, J., & Van Ham, C. (2017). A legitimacy crisis of representative democracy? In C. Van Ham, C. J. Thomassen, K. Aarts, & R. Andeweg (Eds.), Myth and reality of the legitimacy crisis: Explaining trends and cross-national differences in established democracies (pp. 3–16). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Vega, A., & Firestone, J. M. (1995). The effects of gender on congressional behavior and the substantive representation of women. Legislative Studies Quarterly, 20(2), 213–222.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wahlke, J. C. (1967). Public policy and representative government: The role of the represented. Iowa City: University of Iowa.
   Google Scholar
• Werner, A. (2019). Voters’ preferences for party representation: Promise-keeping, responsiveness to public opinion or enacting the common good. International Political Science Review, 40(4), 486–501.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar