Compulsory voting, economic conditions and turnout: explaining the outcome of constitutional referendums

References

• Aitkin, D. (1978). ‘Australia’, in D. Butler and A. Ranney (eds.), Referendums: A Comparative Study of Practice and Theory. Washington, DC: American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research, 123–37.
   Google Scholar
• Altman, David (2002). ‘Popular Initiatives in Uruguay: Confidence Votes on Government or Political Loyalties?’, Electoral Studies, 21:4, 617–30.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Altman, David (2018). Citizenship and Contemporary Direct Democracy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Atikcan, Ece Özlem (2015). Framing the European Union: The Power of Political Arguments in Shaping European Integration. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Austin, J. L. (1975). How to Do Things with Words. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Barber, Benjamin (1984). Strong Democracy: Participatory Politics for a New Age. Berkeley: University of California Press.
   Google Scholar
• Barber, Michael, David Gordon, Ryan Hill, and Joseph Price (2017). ‘Status Quo Bias in Ballot Wording’, Journal of Experimental Political Science, 4:2, 151–60.
   Google Scholar
• Barro, Robert (2013). ‘Inflation and Economic Growth’, Annals of Economics and Finance, 14:1, 121–44.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bowler, Shaun, and Todd Donovan (2002). ‘Do Voters Have a Cue? Television Advertisements as a Source of Information in Citizen-Initiated Referendum Campaigns’, European Journal of Political Research, 41:6, 777–93.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brennan, Thomas Cornelius (1935). Interpreting the Constitution: A Politico-Legal Essay. Melbourne: Melbourne University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Butler, David, and Austin Ranney, eds. (1978). Referendums: A Comparative Study of Practice and Theory. Washington, DC: American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research.
   Google Scholar
• Canes-Wrone, Brandice (2015). ‘From Mass Preferences to Policy’, Annual Review of Political Science, 18:1, 147–65.
   Google Scholar
• Cosgrove, Richard A. (1981). The Rule of Law: Albert Venn Dicey, Victorian Jurist. London: Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Crandall, Christian S., Scott Eidelman, Linda J. Skitka, and Scott G. Morgan (2009). ‘Status Quo Framing Increases Support for Torture’, Social Influence, 4:1, 1–10.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• De Angelis, Andrea, Céline Colombo, and Davide Morisi (2020). ‘Taking Cues from the Government: Heuristic versus Systematic Processing in a Constitutional Referendum’, West European Politics, 43:4, 845–68.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dicey, A. V. (1890). ‘Ought the Referendum to Be Introduced into England?’, Contemporary Review, 57, 489–511.
   Google Scholar
• Druckman, James N., and Rose McDermott (2008). ‘Emotion and the Framing of Risky Choice’, Political Behavior, 30:3, 297–321.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Elkins, Zachary, and Alexander Hudson (2019). ‘The Constitutional Referendum in Historical Perspective’, in David Landau and Hanna Lerner (eds.), Comparative Constitution Making. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, 142–68.
   Google Scholar
• Fitzgibbon, John (2017). ‘When “No” Means “Yes”: A Comparative Study of Referendums in Denmark and Ireland’, in Enjamin Leruth, Nicholas Startin, and Simon Usherwood (eds.), The Routledge Handbook of Euroscepticism. London: Routledge, 280–90.
   Google Scholar
• Franklin, Mark N. (2002). ‘Learning from the Danish Case: A Comment on Palle Svensson’s Critique of the Franklin Thesis’, European Journal of Political Research, 41:6, 751–7.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Franklin, Mark N., Cees van der Eijk, and Michael Marsh (1995). ‘Referendum Outcomes and Trust in Government: Public Support for Europe in the Wake of Maastricht’, West European Politics, 18:3, 101–17.
   Google Scholar
• Gallup, George (1941). ‘Question Wording in Public Opinion Polls’, Sociometry, 4:3, 259–68.
   Google Scholar
• Gherghina, Sergiu (2017). ‘Direct Democracy and Subjective Regime Legitimacy in Europe’, Democratization, 24:4, 613–31.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gherghina, Sergiu, and Brigitte Geissel (2020). ‘Support for Direct and Deliberative Models of Democracy in the UK: Understanding the Difference’, Political Research Exchange, 2:1, 1809474.
   Google Scholar
• Ginsburg, Tom, Zachary Elkins, and Justin Blount (2009). ‘Does the Process of Constitution-Making Matter?’, Annual Review of Law and Social Science, 5:1, 201–23.
   Google Scholar
• Glencross, Andrew, and Alexander Trechsel (2011). ‘First or Second Order Referendums? Understanding the Votes on the EU Constitutional Treaty in Four EU Member States’, West European Politics, 34:4, 755–72.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harguindéguy, Jean-Baptiste, Enrique Sánchez Sánchez, and Almudena Sánchez Sánchez (2021). ‘Why Do Central States Accept Holding Independence Referendums? Analyzing the Role of State Peripheries’, Electoral Studies, 69:02248, 102248.
   Google Scholar
• Hobolt, Sara B. (2007). ‘Taking Cues on Europe? Voter Competence and Party Endorsements in Referendums on European Integration’, European Journal of Political Research, 46:2, 151–82.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hobolt, Sara Binzer (2009). Europe in Question: Referendums on European Integration. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Huntington, Samuel P. (1991). The Third Wave: Democratization in the Late Twentieth Century. Norman and London: University of Oklahoma Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ivaldi, Gilles (2006). ‘Beyond France’s 2005 Referendum on the European Constitutional Treaty: Second-Order Model, Anti-Establishment Attitudes and the End of the Alternative European Utopia’, West European Politics, 29:1, 47–69.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johnston, Richard, André Blais, Elisabeth Gidengil, and Neil Nevitte (1996). The Challenge of Direct Democracy: The 1992 Canadian Referendum. Montreal/Kingston: McGill–Queen’s University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Key, V. O.Jr. (1968). The Responsible Electorate: Rationality in Presidential Voting 1936-1960. New York: Vintage Books.
   Google Scholar
• Kriesi, Hanspeter (2005). Direct Democratic Choice: The Swiss Experience. Plymouth: Lexington Books.
   Google Scholar
• Landemore, Hélène (2018). ‘Referendums Are Never Merely Referendums: On the Need to Make Popular Vote Processes More Deliberative’, Swiss Political Science Review, 24:3, 320–7.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• LeDuc, Lawrence (2003). The Politics of Direct Democracy: Referendums in Global Perspective. Toronto: Broadview Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lewis-Beck, Michael S., and Tom W. Rice (1992). Forecasting Elections. Washington D.C.: Congressional Quarterly Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lewis-Beck, Michael S., and Richard Nadeau (2011). ‘Economic Voting Theory: Testing New Dimensions’, Electoral Studies, 30:2, 288–94.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lewis-Beck, Michael S., and Mary Stegmaier (2013). ‘The VP-Function Revisited: A Survey of the Literature on Vote and Popularity Functions After Over 40 Years’, Public Choice, 157:3-4, 367–85.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marx, Karl (2022). Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy. New York: International Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• Matsusaka, John G. (2020). Let the People Rule: How Direct Democracy Can Meet the Populist Challenge. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• McAllister, Ian (2001). ‘Elections Without Cues: The 1999 Australian Republic Referendum’, Australian Journal of Political Science, 36:2, 247–69.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mill, John Stuart (1958). Considerations on Representative Government. New York: Liberal Arts Press.
   Google Scholar
• Morel, Laurence (2012). ‘Referendum’, in Michel Rosenfeld and András Sajó (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Comparative Constitutional Law. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 501–28.
   Google Scholar
• Morisi, Davide, Céline Colombo, and Andrea De Angelis (2021). ‘Who is Afraid of a Change? Ideological Differences in Support for the Status Quo in Direct Democracy’, Journal of Elections, Public Opinion and Parties, 31:3, 309–28.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nannestad, Peter, and Martin Paldam (1994). ‘The VP-Function: A Survey of the Literature on Vote and Popularity Functions after 25 Years’, Public Choice, 79:3–4, 213–45.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pasquino, Gianfranco, and Marco Valbruzzi (2017). ‘Italy Says No: The 2016 Constitutional Referendum and Its Consequences’, Journal of Modern Italian Studies, 22:2, 145–62.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Qvortrup, Matt (2014). Referendums and Ethnic Conflict. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
   Google Scholar
• Qvortrup, Matt (2017). ‘The Rise of Referendums: Demystifying Direct Democracy’, Journal of Democracy, 28:3, 141–52.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Qvortrup, Matt, ed. (2018). Referendums around the World: With a Foreword by Sir David Butler. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Qvortrup, Matt, and Leah Trueblood (2022). ‘Schmitt, Dicey, and the Power and Limits of Referendums in the United Kingdom’, Legal Studies, 42:3, 396–407.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rawls, John (1989). ‘The Domain of the Political and Overlapping Consensus’, New York University Law Review, 64:2, 233–55.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reilly, Shauna, and Sean Richey (2011). ‘Ballot Question Readability and Roll-Off: The Impact of Language Complexity’, Political Research Quarterly, 64:1, 59–67.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rocher, François, and André Lecours (2017). ‘The Correct Expression of Popular Will: Does the Wording of a Referendum Question Matter?’, in Laurence Morel and Matt Qvortrup (eds.), The Routledge Handbook to Referendums and Direct Democracy. London: Routledge, 227–46.
   Google Scholar
• Sartori, Giovanni (1976). Parties and Party Systems: A Framework for Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Setälä, Maija (1999). ‘Referendums in Western Europe – A Wave of Direct Democracy?’, Scandinavian Political Studies, 22:4, 327–40.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Silagadze, Nanuli, and Sergiu Gherghina (2018). ‘When, Who and How Matter: Explaining the Success of Referendums in Europe’, Comparative European Politics, 16:5, 905–22.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smith, Dan, and Caroline Tolbert (2004). Educated by Initiative: The Effect of Direct Democracy on Citizens and Political Organisations in the American States. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
   Google Scholar
• Soleimani, Hassan, and Maliheh Nouraei Yeganeh (2016). ‘An Analysis of Pragmatic Competence in 2013 Presidential Election Candidates of Iran: A Comparison of Speech Acts with the Poll Outcomes’, Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 6:4, 706–15.
   Google Scholar
• Suiter, Jane, and Theresa Reidy (2015). ‘It’s the Campaign Learning Stupid: An Examination of a Volatile Irish Referendum’, Parliamentary Affairs, 68:1, 182–202.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Svensson, Palle (2002). ‘Five Danish Referendums on the European Community and European Union: A Critical Assessment of the Franklin Thesis’, European Journal of Political Research, 41:6, 733–50.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• de Tocqueville, Alexis (2009). De la Démocratie en Amerique. 1848th ed. Indianapolis: Liberty Fund.
   Google Scholar
• West, Karleen Jones, and Hoon Lee (2014). ‘Veto Players Revisited: Internal and External Factors Influencing Policy Production’, Legislative Studies Quarterly, 39:2, 227–60.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Williams, George, and David Hume (2010). People Power: The History and Future of the Referendum in Australia. Sydney: University of New South Wales Press.
   Google Scholar
• Woldring, Klaes (1976). ‘The Case for Voluntary Voting in Referendums’, Politics, 11:2, 209–11.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wright, Kim, and Tamsin Armstrong (2016). ‘The Construction of an Inventory of Responses to Positive Affective States’, SAGE Open, 6:1, 215824401562279.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yale, François, and Claire Durand (2011). ‘What Did Quebeckers Want? Impact of Question Wording, Constitutional Proposal and Context on Support for Sovereignty, 1976–2008’, American Review of Canadian Studies, 41:3, 242–58.
   Google Scholar