Inequality in the public priority perceptions of elected representatives

References

• Aaldering, Loes (2017). ‘Political Representation and Educational Attainment: Evidence from The Netherlands (1994–2010)’, Political Studies, 65:1_suppl, 4–23.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Alexandrova, Petya, Anne Rasmussen, and Dimiter Toshkov (2016). ‘Agenda Responsiveness in the European Council: Public Priorities, Policy Problems and Political Attention’, West European Politics, 39:4, 605–27.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bachrach, Peter, and Morton S. Baratz (1962). ‘Two Faces of Power’, American Political Science Review, 56:4, 947–52.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bartels, Larry M. (2008). Unequal Democracy: The Political Economy of the New Gilded Age. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Baumgartner, Frank, and Bryan D. Jones (1993). Agendas and Instability in American Politics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Belchior, Ana Maria (2014). ‘Explaining MPs’ Perceptions of Voters’ Positions in a Party-Mediated Representation System: Evidence from the Portuguese Case’, Party Politics, 20:3, 403–15.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bevan, Shaun, and Will Jennings (2014). ‘Representation, Agendas and Institutions’, European Journal of Political Research, 53:1, 37–56.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bovens, Mark, andAnchrit Wille (2017). Diploma Democracy: The Rise of Political Meritocracy. New York: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Broockman, David E. (2014). ‘Distorted Communication, Unequal Representation: Constituents Communicate Less to Representatives Not of Their Race’, American Journal of Political Science, 58:2, 307–21.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Broockman, David E., and Christopher Skovron (2018). ‘Bias in Perceptions of Public Opinion among Political Elites’, American Political Science Review, 112:3, 542–63.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Butler, Daniel M., and David W. Nickerson (2011). ‘Can Learning Constituency Opinion Affect How Legislators Vote? Results from a Field Experiment’, Quarterly Journal of Political Science, 6:1, 55–83.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Celis, Karen, Sarah Childs, Johanna Kantola, and Mona Lena Krook (2008). ‘Rethinking Women’s Substantive Representation’, Representation, 44:2, 99–110.
   Google Scholar
• Clausen, Aage R. (1977). ‘The Accuracy of Leader Perceptions of Constituency Views’, Legislative Studies Quarterly, 2:4, 361–84.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Converse, Philip E., and Roy Pierce (1986). Political Representation in France. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Deschouwer, Kris, and Sam Depauw (2014). Representing the People: A Survey among Members of Statewide and Sub-State Parliaments. 1st ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Esaiasson, Peter, and Sören Holmberg (1996). Representation from Above: Members of Parliament and Representative Democracy in Sweden. Aldershot: Dartmouth.
   Google Scholar
• Franklin, Mark N. (1999). ‘Electoral Engineering and Cross-National Turnout Differences: What Role for Compulsory Voting?’, British Journal of Political Science, 29:1, 205–16.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gidengil, Elisabeth, Blais André, Nadeau Richard, and Neil Nevitte (2003). ‘Women to the Left? Gender Differences in Political Beliefs and Policy Preferences’, in Manon Tremblay and Linda Trimble (eds.), Women and Electoral Politics in Canada. New York: Oxford University Press, 140–59.
   Google Scholar
• Gilens, Martin (2012). Affluence and Influence: Economic Inequality and Political Power in America. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
   Google Scholar
• Green-Pedersen, Christoffer, and Stefaan Walgrave (2014). Agenda Setting, Policies, and Political Systems: A Comparative Approach. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Griffin, John D., and Brian Newman (2005). ‘Are Voters Better Represented?’, The Journal of Politics, 67:4, 1206–27.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hakhverdian, Armen (2015). ‘Does It Matter That Most Representatives Are Higher Educated?’, Swiss Political Science Review, 21:2, 237–45.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hedlund, Ronald D., and H. Paul Friesema (1972). ‘Representatives’ Perceptions of Constituency Opinion’, The Journal of Politics, 34:3, 730–52.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hertel-Fernandez, Alexander, Matto Mildenberger, and Leah C. Stokes (2019). ‘Legislative Staff and Representation in Congress’, American Political Science Review, 113:1, 1–18.
   Web of Science ®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.
   Google Scholar
• Jones, Bryan D., and Frank R. Baumgartner (2004). ‘Representation and Agenda Setting’, Policy Studies Journal, 32:1, 1–24.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jones, Bryan D., and Frank R. Baumgartner (2005). The Politics of Attention: How Government Prioritizes Attention. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kriesi, Hanspeter, Edgar Grande, Romain Lachat, Martin Dolezal, Simon Bornschier, and Timotheos Frey (2006). ‘Globalization and the Transformation of the National Political Space: Six European Countries Compared’, European Journal of Political Research, 45:6, 921–56.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lindeboom, Gert-Jan (2012). ‘Public Priorities in Government’s Hands: Corresponding Policy Agendas in The Netherlands?’, Acta Politica, 47:4, 443–67.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mansbridge, Jane (1999). ‘Should Blacks Represent Blacks and Women Represent Women? A Contingent “Yes’, The Journal of Politics, 61:3, 628–65.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mansbridge, Jane (2003). ‘Rethinking Representation’, American Political Science Review, 97:4, 515–28.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Miler, Kristina C. (2007). ‘The View from the Hill: Legislative Perceptions of the District’, Legislative Studies Quarterly, 32:4, 597–628.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Miller, Wakken E., and Donald E. Stokes (1963). ‘Constituency Influence in Congress’, American Political Science Review, 57:1, 45–56.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Paxton, Pamela, Sheri Kunovich, and Melanie M. Hughes (2007). ‘Gender in Politics’, Annual Review of Sociology, 33:1, 263–84.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pereira, Miguel M. (2020). ‘Understanding and Reducing Biases in Elite Beliefs about the Electorate’, unpublished manuscript.
   Google Scholar
• Peters, Yvette (2018). ‘Democratic Representation and Political Inequality: How Social Differences Translate into Differential Representation’, French Politics, 16:3, 341–57.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reher, Stefanie (2015). ‘Explaining Cross-National Variation in the Relationship between Priority Congruence and Satisfaction with Democracy’, European Journal of Political Research, 54:1, 160–81.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reher, Stefanie (2018). ‘Gender and Opinion – Policy Congruence in Europe’, European Political Science Review, 10:4, 613–35.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rosset, Jan (2016). ‘Economically Based Inequalities in Political Representation: Where Do They Come from?’, in Amanda Machin and Nico Stehr (eds.), Understanding Inequality: Social Costs and Benefits. Wiesbaden: Springer VS, 241–56.
   Google Scholar
• Schakel, Wouter, and Daphne Van Der Pas (2021). ‘Degrees of Influence: Educational Inequality in Policy Representation’, European Journal of Political Research, 60:2, 418–37.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schlozman, Kay Lehman, Nancy Burns, Sidney Verba, and Jesse Donahue (1995). ‘Gender and Citizen Participation: Is There a Different Voice?’, American Journal of Political Science, 39:2, 267–93.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schlozman, Kay, Verba Sidney, and Henry E. Brady (1999). ‘Civic Participation and the Equality Problem’, in Theda Skocpol and Morris P. Fiorina (eds.), Civic Engagement in American Democracy. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press, 427–59.
   Google Scholar
• Schwindt-Bayer, Leslie A. (2009). ‘Making Quotas Work: The Effect of Gender Quota Laws on the Election of Women’, Legislative Studies Quarterly, 34:1, 5–28.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shapiro, Robert Y., and Harpreet Mahajan (1986). ‘Gender Differences in Policy Preferences: A Summary of Trends from the 1960s to the 1980s’, Public Opinion Quarterly, 50:1, 42–61.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Soroka, Stuart N., and Christopher Wlezien (2008). ‘On the Limits to Inequality in Representation’, PS: Political Science & Politics, 41:02, 319–27.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Soroka, Stuart, and Christopher Wlezien (2010). Degrees of Democracy: Politics, Public Opinion and Policy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Soroka, Stuart, Erin Penner, and Kelly Blidook (2009). ‘Constituency Influence in Parliament’, Canadian Journal of Political Science, 42:3, 563–91.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stimson, James A., Michael B. Mackuen, and Robert S. Erikson (1995). ‘Dynamic Representation’, American Political Science Review, 89:3, 543–65.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stokes, Donald E. (1963). ‘Spatial Models of Party Competition’, American Political Science Review, 57:2, 368–77.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Uslaner, Eric, and Donald Weber (1979). ‘U.S. State Legislators’ Opinions and Perceptions of Constituency Attitudes’, Legislative Studies Quarterly, 4:4, 563–85.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Aelst, Peter, and Stefaan Walgrave (2016). ‘Information and Arena: The Dual Function of the News Media for Political Elites’, Journal of Communication, 66:3, 496–518.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Verba, Sidney, Schlozman Kay, and Henri Brady (1995). Voice and Equality: Civic Voluntarism in American Politics. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Walgrave, Stefaan, and Jeroen K. Joly (2018). ‘Surveying Individual Political Elites: A Comparative Three-Country Study’, Quality & Quantity, 52:5, 2221–37.
   Google Scholar
• Wlezien, Christopher (2005). ‘On the Salience of Political Issues: The Problem with “Most Important Problem’”, Electoral Studies, 24:4, 555–7.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar