Which Issues do Parties Emphasise? Salience Strategies and Party Organisation in Multiparty Systems

References

• Albright, Jeremy J. (2008). ‘Partisans or Independents? Evidence for Campaign Targets from Elite Interviews in Spain’, Electoral Studies, 27:4, 711–22.10.1016/j.electstud.2007.10.008
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ansolabehere, Steven, and Shanto Iyengar (1994). ‘Riding the Wave and Claiming Ownership over Issues: The Joint Effects of Advertising and News Coverage in Campaigns’, Public Opinion Quarterly, 58:3, 335–57.10.1086/269431
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bäck, Hanna, Marc Debus, and Patrick Dumont (2011). ‘Who Gets What in Coalition Governments? Predictors of Portfolio Allocation in Parliamentary Democracies’, European Journal of Political Research, 50:4, 441–78.10.1111/ejpr.2011.50.issue-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bartle, John, and Samantha Laycock (2012). ‘Telling More than They Can Know? Does the Most Important Issue Really Reveal What is Most Important to Voters?’ Electoral Studies, 31:4, 679–88.10.1016/j.electstud.2012.07.005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beck, Nathaniel, and Jonathan N. Katz (1995). ‘What to Do (and Not to Do) with Time-Series Cross-Section Data’, American Political Science Review, 89:03, 634–47.10.2307/2082979
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beck, Nathaniel, and Jonathan N. Katz (1996). ‘Nuisance vs. Substance: Specifying and Estimating Time-Series-Cross-Section Models’, Political Analysis, 6:1, 1–36.10.1093/pan/6.1.1
   Google Scholar
• Bélanger, Éric, and Bonnie M. Meguid (2008). ‘Issue Salience, Issue Ownership, and Issue-Based Vote Choice’, Electoral Studies, 27:3, 477–91.10.1016/j.electstud.2008.01.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bille, Lars (2001). ‘Democratizing a Democratic Procedure: Myth or Reality? Candidate Selection in Western European Parties, 1960–1990’, Party Politics, 7:3, 363–80.10.1177/1354068801007003006
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brandenburg, Heinz (2002). ‘Who Follows Whom? Investigating Agenda Dynamics between Parties and the Media over the Course of an Electoral Campaign’, Harvard International Journal of Press/Politics, 7:3, 34–54.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Budge, Ian, and Dennis J. Farlie (1983). Explaining and Predicting Elections: Issue Effects and Party Strategies in Twenty-Three Democracies. London: George Allen & Unwin.
   Google Scholar
• Burchell, Jon (2001). ‘Evolving or Conforming? Assessing Organisational Reform within European Green Parties’, West European Politics, 24:3, 113–34.10.1080/01402380108425455
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carmines, Edward G., James A., Stimson (1993). ‘On the Evolution of Political Issues’, in William H. Riker (ed.), Agenda Formation. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 151–168.
   Google Scholar
• Clarke, Harold D., David Sanders, Marianne C. Stewart, and Paul F. Whiteley (2009). Performance Politics and the British Voter. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511596872
   Google Scholar
• Damore, David F. (2004). ‘The Dynamics of Issue Ownership in Presidential Campaigns’, Political Research Quarterly, 57:3, 391–97.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Damore, David F. (2005). ‘Issue Convergence in Presidential Campaigns’, Political Behavior, 27:1, 71–97.10.1007/s11109-005-3077-6
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dolezal, Martin, Laurenz Ennser-Jedenastik, Wolfgang C. Müller, and Anna Katharina Winkler (2012). ‘The Life Cycle of Party Manifestos: The Austrian Case’, West European Politics, 35:4, 869–95.10.1080/01402382.2012.682349
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Elmelund-Præstekær, Christian (2011). ‘Issue Ownership as a Determinant of Negative Campaigning’, International Political Science Review, 32:2, 209–21.10.1177/0192512110382028
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Geys, Benny (2012). ‘Success and Failure in Electoral Competition: Selective Issue Emphasis under Incomplete Issue Ownership’, Electoral Studies, 31:2, 406–12.10.1016/j.electstud.2012.01.005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Green, Jane (2011). ‘A Test of Core Vote Theories: The British Conservatives, 1997–2005’, British Journal of Political Science, 41:4, 735–64.10.1017/S0007123411000111
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Green, Jane, and Sara B. Hobolt (2008). ‘Owning the Issue Agenda: Party Strategies and Vote Choices in British Elections’, Electoral Studies, 27:3, 460–76.10.1016/j.electstud.2008.02.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Green, Jane, and Will Jennings. 2012a. ‘A Party Competition Theory of Governing Party Agendas: Evidence from the U.S. and U.K.’ Paper presented at the annual Midwest Political Science Association conference.
   Google Scholar
• Green, Jane, and Will Jennings (2012b). ‘The Dynamics of Issue Competence and Vote for Parties in and out of Power: An Analysis of Valence in Britain, 1979–1997’, European Journal of Political Research, 51:4, 469–503.10.1111/ejpr.2012.51.issue-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Green, Jane, and Will Jennings (2012c). ‘Valence as Macro-Competence: An Analysis of Mood in Party Competence Evaluations in Great Britain’, British Journal of Political Science, 42:02, 311–43.10.1017/S0007123411000330
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Greene, Kenneth F. (2002). ‘Opposition Party Strategy and Spatial Competition in Dominant Party Regimes: A Theory and the Case of Mexico’, Comparative Political Studies, 35:7, 755–83.10.1177/0010414002035007001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Green-Pedersen, Christoffer (2007). ‘The Growing Importance of Issue Competition: The Changing Nature of Party Competition in Western Europe’, Political Studies, 55:3, 607–28.10.1111/post.2007.55.issue-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Green-Pedersen, Christoffer, and Peter B. Mortensen (2010). ‘Who Sets the Agenda and Who Responds to It in the Danish Parliament? A New Model of Issue Competition and Agenda-Setting’, European Journal of Political Research, 49:2, 257–81.10.1111/ejpr.2010.49.issue-2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Green-Pedersen, Christoffer, and Rune Stubager (2010). ‘The Political Conditionality of Mass Media Influence: When Do Parties Follow Mass Media Attention?’ British Journal of Political Science, 40:03, 663–77.10.1017/S0007123410000037
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hayes, Danny (2008). ‘Party Reputations, Journalistic Expectations: How Issue Ownership Influences Election News’, Political Communication, 25:4, 377–400.10.1080/10584600802426981
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Holian, David B. (2004). ‘He’s Stealing My Issues! Clinton’s Crime Rhetoric and the Dynamics of Issue Ownership’, Political Behavior, 26:2, 95–124.10.1023/B:POBE.0000035959.35567.16
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hopmann, David N., Christian Elmelund-Praestekaer, Rens Vliegenthart, Claes H. de Vreese, and Erik Albaek (2012). ‘Party Media Agenda-Setting: How Parties Influence Election News Coverage’, Party Politics, 18:2, 173–191.10.1177/1354068810380097
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Iyengar, Shanto (1991). Is Anyone Responsible? How Television Frames Political Issues, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.10.7208/chicago/9780226388533.001.0001
   Google Scholar
• Iyengar, Shanto, and Donald R. Kinder (1987). News That Matters: Television and American Public Opinion. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Jackson, John E. (2002). ‘A Seemingly Unrelated Regression Model for Analyzing Multiparty Elections’, Political Analysis, 10:1, 49–65.10.1093/pan/10.1.49
   Google Scholar
• Jennings, Will, and Peter John (2009). ‘The Dynamics of Political Attention: Public Opinion and the Queen’s Speech in the United Kingdom’, American Journal of Political Science, 53:4, 838–54.10.1111/ajps.2009.53.issue-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jennings, Will, and Christopher Wlezien (2011). ‘Distinguishing between Most Important Problems and Issues?’ Public Opinion Quarterly, 75:3, 545–55.10.1093/poq/nfr025
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jerit, Jennifer (2008). ‘Issue Framing and Engagement: Rhetorical Strategy in Public Policy Debates’, Political Behavior, 30:1, 1–24.10.1007/s11109-007-9041-x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jones, Bryan D., and Frank R. Baumgartner (2004). ‘Representation and Agenda Setting’, Policy Studies Journal, 32:1, 1–24.10.1111/psj.2004.32.issue-1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kaplan, Noah, David K. Park, and Travis N. Ridout (2006). ‘Dialogue in American Political Campaigns? An Examination of Issue Convergence in Candidate Television Advertising’, American Journal of Political Science, 50:3, 724–36.10.1111/ajps.2006.50.issue-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Katz, Jonathan, and Gary King (1999). ‘A Statistical Model for Multiparty Electoral Data’, American Political Science Review, 93:1, 15–32.10.2307/2585758
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Katz, Richard, and Peter Mair (1995). ‘Changing Models of Party Organization and Party Democracy: The Emergence of the Cartel Party’, Party Politics, 1:1, 5–28.10.1177/1354068895001001001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kitschelt, Herbert (1989). The Logics of Party Formation: Ecological Politics in Belgium and West Germany. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kleinnijenhuis, Jan, and Jan A. De Ridder (1998). ‘Issue News and Electoral Volatility - A Comparative Analysis of Media Effects during the 1994 Election Campaigns in Germany and the Netherlands’, European Journal of Political Research, 33:3, 413–37.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Krosnick, Jon A. (1988). ‘The Role of Attitude Importance in Social Evaluation: A Study of Policy Preferences, Presidential Candidate Evaluations, and Voting Behavior’, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 55:2, 196–210.10.1037/0022-3514.55.2.196
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Krouwel, André, and Annemarie van Elfrinkhof (2013). ‘Combining Strengths of Methods of Party Positioning to Counter Their Weaknesses: The Development of a New Methodology to Calibrate Parties on Issues and Ideological Dimensions’, Quality and Quantity, DOI: 10.1007/s11135-013-9846-0.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Laver, Michael, and Ben W. Hunt (1992). Policy and Party Competition. New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Luebbert, Gregory (1986). Comparative Democracy: Policy Making and Governing Coalitions in Europe and Israel. New York: Columbia University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lundell, Krister (2004). ‘Determinants of Candidate Selection: The Degree of Centralization in Comparative Perspective’, Party Politics, 10:1, 25–47.10.1177/1354068804039119
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mair, Peter, and Ingrid van Biezen (2001). ‘Party Membership in Twenty European Democracies, 1980-2000’, Party Politics, 7:1, 5–21.10.1177/1354068801007001001
   Web of Science ®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.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meguid, Bonnie M. (2008). Party Competition between Unequals: Strategies and Electoral Fortunes in Western Europe. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511510298
   Google Scholar
• Meyer, Thomas M., and Markus Wagner (2013). ‘Mainstream or Niche? Vote-Seeking Incentives and the Programmatic Strategies of Political Parties’, Comparative Political Studies, 46:10, 1246–272.10.1177/0010414013489080
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mikhaylov, Slava, Michael Laver, and Kenneth Benoit (2012). ‘Coder Reliability and Misclassification in the Human Coding of Party Manifestos’, Political Analysis, 20:1, 78–91.10.1093/pan/mpr047
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mudde, Cas (2007). Populist Radical Right Parties in Europe. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511492037
   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
• Nadeau, Richard, François Pétry, and Éric Bélanger (2010). ‘Issue-Based Strategies in Election Campaigns: The Case of Health Care in the 2000 Canadian Federal Election’, Political Communication, 27:4, 367–88.10.1080/10584609.2010.516797
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nassmacher, Karl-Heinz, ed. (2001). Foundations for Democracy. Nomos: Baden-Baden.
   Google Scholar
• Norpoth, Helmut, and Bruce Buchanan (1992). ‘Wanted: The Education President: Issue Trespassing by Political Candidates’, Public Opinion Quarterly, 56:1, 87–99.10.1086/269297
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Page, Benjamin I. (1978). Choices and Echoes in Presidential Elections. Chicago, IL: Chicago University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Panebianco, Angelo (1988). Political Parties: Organization and Power. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Pedersen, Helene Helboe (2012). ‘What Do Parties Want? Policy versus Office’, West European Politics, 35:4, 896–910.10.1080/01402382.2012.682350
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pennings, Paul (2011). ‘Assessing the “Gold Standard” of Party Policy Placements: Is Computerized Replication Possible?’ Electoral Studies, 30:3, 561–70.10.1016/j.electstud.2011.05.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Petrocik, John R. (1996). ‘Issue Ownership in Presidential Elections, with a 1980 Case Study’, American Journal of Political Science, 40:3, 825–50.10.2307/2111797
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Petrocik, John R., William L. Benoit, and Glenn J. Hansen (2003). ‘Issue Ownership and Presidential Campaigning, 1952-2000’, Political Science Quarterly, 118:4, 599–626.10.1002/j.1538-165X.2003.tb00407.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Robertson, David (1976). A Theory of Party Competition. London: Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• Scarrow, Susan E. (2006). ‘Party Subsidies and the Freezing of Party Competition: Do Cartel Mechanisms Work?’ West European Politics, 29:4, 619–39.10.1080/01402380600842148
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schumacher, Gijs, Catherine E. De Vries, and Barbara Vis (2013). ‘Why Political Parties Change Their Position: Party Organization & Environmental Incentives’, Journal of Politics, 75:02, 464–77.10.1017/S0022381613000145
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sides, John (2006). ‘The Origins of Campaign Agendas’, British Journal of Political Science, 36:03, 407–36.10.1017/S0007123406000226
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sides, John (2007). ‘The Consequences of Campaign Agendas’, American Politics Research, 35:4, 465–88.10.1177/1532673X07300648
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sigelman, Lee, and Emmett H. Buell (2004). ‘Avoidance or Engagement? Issue Convergence in U.S. Presidential Campaigns, 1960-2000’, American Journal of Political Science, 48:4, 650–61.10.1111/ajps.2004.48.issue-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smith, Jason M. (2010). ‘Does Crime Pay? Issue Ownership, Political Opportunity, and the Populist Right in Western Europe’, Comparative Political Studies, 43:11, 1471–498.10.1177/0010414010372593
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Spoon, Jae-Jae, and Heike Klüver (forthcoming). ‘Do Parties Respond? How Electoral Context Influences Party Responsiveness’, Electoral Studies, DOI: 10.1016/j.electstud.2014.04.014.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Steenbergen, Marco R., and David J. Scott (2004). ‘Contesting Europe? The Salience of European Integration as a Party Issue’, in Gary Marks and Marco R. Steenbergen (eds.), European Integration and Political Conflict. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 165–92.
   Google Scholar
• Strøm, Kaare (1990). ‘A Behavioral Theory of Competitive Political Parties’, American Journal of Political Science, 34:2, 565–98.10.2307/2111461
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tomz, Michael, Joshua A. Tucker, and Jason Wittenberg (2002). ‘An Easy and Accurate Regression Model for Multiparty Electoral Data’, Political Analysis, 10:1, 66–83.10.1093/pan/10.1.66
   Google Scholar
• Tresch, Anke, Jonas Lefevere, and Stefaan Walgrave (2013). ‘“Steal Me If You Can!”: The Impact of Campaign Messages on Associative Issue Ownership’, Party Politics, DOI: 10.1177/1354068812472576.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Biezen, Ingrid, Peter Mair, and Thomas Poguntke (2012). ‘Going, Going, … Gone? The Decline of Party Membership in Contemporary Europe’, European Journal of Political Research, 51:1, 24–56.10.1111/ejpr.2012.51.issue-1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vavreck, Lynn (2009). The Message Matters: The Economy and Presidential Campaigns. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Volkens, Andrea, Onawa Lacewell, Pola Lehmann, Sven Regel, Henrike Schultze, and Annika Werner (2011). The Manifesto Data Collection. Manifesto Project (MRG/CMP/MARPOR). Berlin: Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin für Sozialforschung (WZB).
   Google Scholar
• Volkens, Andrea, Judith Bara, Ian Budge, Michael D. McDonald, and Hans-Dieter Klingemann, eds. (2013). Mapping Policy Preferences from Texts: Statistical Solutions for Manifesto Analysts: 54 Democracies, 1945–2012. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Wagner, Markus (2012). ‘When Do Parties Emphasise Extreme Positions? How Strategic Incentives for Policy Differentiation Influence Issue Importance’, European Journal of Political Research, 51:1, 64–88.10.1111/ejpr.2012.51.issue-1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walgrave, Stefaan, and Knut De Swert (2007). ‘Where Does Issue Ownership Come from? From the Party or from the Media? Issue-Party Identifications in Belgium, 1991–2005’, The Harvard International Journal of Press/Politics, 12:1, 37–67.10.1177/1081180X06297572
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walgrave, Stefaan, Jonas Lefevere, and Michiel Nuytemans (2009). ‘Issue Ownership Stability and Change: How Political Parties Claim and Maintain Issues through Media Appearances’, Political Communication, 26:2, 153–72.10.1080/10584600902850718
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walgrave, Stefaan, Jonas Lefevere, and Anke Tresch (2012). ‘The Associative Dimension of Issue Ownership’, Public Opinion Quarterly, 76:4, 771–82.10.1093/poq/nfs023
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar