Losing Happily? The Mitigating Effect of Democracy and Quality of Government on the Winner–Loser Gap in Political Support

References

• Anderson, C. J., Blais, A., Bowler, S., Donovan, T., & Listhaug, O. (2005). Losers’ consent: Elections and democratic legitimacy. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Anderson, C. J., & Guillory, C. A. (1997). Political institutions and satisfaction with democracy: A cross-national analysis of consensus and majoritarian systems. The American Political Science Review, 91(1), 66–81. doi:10.2307/2952259
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anderson, C. J., & Lo Tempio, A. J. (2002). Winning, losing and political trust in America. British Journal of Political Science, 32(2), 335–351. doi:10.1017/S0007123402000133
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anderson, J., & Tverdova, Y. V. (2001). Winners, losers, and attitudes about government in contemporary democracies. International Political Science Review, 22(4), 321–338. doi:10.1177/0192512101022004003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anderson, J., & Tverdova, Y. V. (2003). Corruption, political allegiances, and attitudes toward government in contemporary democracies. American Journal of Political Science, 47(1), 91–109. doi:10.1111/1540-5907.00007
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bäck, H., & Hadenius, A. (2008). Democracy and state capacity: Exploring a J-Shaped relationship. Governance, 21(1), 1–24. doi:10.1111/j.1468-0491.2007.00383.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Banducci, S. A., & Karp, J. A. (2003). How elections change the way citizens view the political system: Campaigns, media effects and electoral outcomes in comparative perspective. British Journal of Political Science, 33(03), 443–467. doi:10.1017/S000712340300019X
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beck, T., Clarke, G., Groff, A., Keefer, P., & Walsh, P. (2001). New tools in comparative political economy: The database of political institutions. World Bank Economic Review, 15(1), 165–176. doi:10.1093/wber/15.1.165
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bernauer, J., & Vatter, A. (2012). Can’t get no satisfaction with the Westminster model? Winners, losers and the effects of consensual and direct democratic institutions on satisfaction with democracy. European Journal of Political Research, 51(4), 435–468. doi:10.1111/j.1475-6765.2011.02007.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Blais, A., & Gélineau, F. (2007). Winning, losing and satisfaction with democracy. Political Studies, 55(2), 425–441. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9248.2007.00659.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bormann, N.-C., & Golder, M. (2013). Democratic electoral systems around the world, 1946-2011. Electoral Studies, 32(2), 360–369. doi:10.1016/j.electstud.2013.01.005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bowler, S., & Donovan, T. (2007). Reasoning about institutional change: Winners, losers and support for electoral reforms. British Journal of Political Science, 37(3), 455–476. doi:10.1017/S0007123407000245
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Canache, D., Mondak, J. J., & Seligson, M. A. (2001). Meaning and measurement in cross-national research on satisfaction with democracy. Public Opinion Quarterly, 65(4), 506–528. doi:10.1086/323576
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chang, E., Chu, Y., & Wu, W. (2014). Consenting to lose or expecting to win? Inter-temporal changes in voters’ winner-loser status and satisfaction with democracy. In J. Thomassen (Ed.), Elections and democracy: Representation and accountability (pp. 232–253). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Charron, N., & Lapuente, V. (2010). Does democracy produce quality of government? European Journal of Political Research, 49(4), 443–470. doi:10.1111/j.1475-6765.2009.01906.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Craig, S. C., Martinez, M. D., & Kane, J. G. (2006). Winners, losers, and election context: voter responses to the 2000 presidential election. Political Research Quarterly, 59(4), 579–592. doi:10.1177/106591290605900407
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Curini, L., Jou, W., & Memoli, V. (2012). Satisfaction with democracy and the winner/loser debate: The role of policy preferences and past experience. British Journal of Political Science, 42(2), 241–261. doi:10.1017/S0007123411000275
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cutler, F., Nuesser, A., & Nyblade, B. (2013). Evaluating the quality of democracy with individual level models of satisfaction: Or, A complete model of satisfaction with democracy. Paper presented at the ECPR General Conference, Bordeaux, 4–7 September.
   Google Scholar
• Dahlberg, S., & Holmberg, S. (2014). Democracy and bureaucracy: How their quality matters for popular satisfaction. West European Politics, 37(3), 515–537. doi:10.1080/01402382.2013.830468
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dahlberg, S., Linde, J., & Holmberg, S. (2015). Democratic discontent in old and new democracies: Assessing the importance of democratic input and governmental output. Political Studies, 63(S1), 18–37. doi:10.1111/1467-9248.12170
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Esaiasson, P. (2011a). Good losers in democracy. Statsvetenskaplig Tidskrift, 113(1), 74–82.
   Google Scholar
• Esaiasson, P. (2011b). Electoral losers revisited – How citizens react to defeat at the ballot box. Electoral Studies, 30(1), 102–113. doi:10.1016/j.electstud.2010.09.009
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fukuyama, F. (2011). The origins of political order: From prehuman times to the French revolution. London, UK: Profile Books.
   Google Scholar
• Gilley, B. (2009). The right to rule: How states win and lose legitimacy. New York, NY: Columbia University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Holmberg, S. (1999). Down and down we go: Political trust in Sweden. In P. Norris (Ed.), Critical citizens: Global support for democratic governance (pp. 103–122). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Linde, J. (2012). Why feed the hand that bites you? Perceptions of procedural fairness and system support in post-communist democracies. European Journal of Political Research, 51(3), 410–434. doi:10.1111/j.1475-6765.2011.02005.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Linde, J., & Ekman, J. (2003). Satisfaction with democracy: A note on a frequently used indicator in comparative politics. European Journal of Political Research, 42(3), 391–408. doi:10.1111/1475-6765.00089
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Linde, J., & Erlingsson, G. Ó. (2013). The eroding effect of corruption on system support in Sweden. Governance, 26(4), 585–603. doi:10.1111/gove.12004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lühiste, K. (2013). Social protection and satisfaction with democracy: A multi-level analysis. Political Studies, 62(4), 784–803. doi:10.1111/1467-9248.12080
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Magalhães, P. C. (2014). Government effectiveness and support for democracy. European Journal of Political Research, 53(1), 77–97. doi:10.1111/1475-6765.12024
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moehler, D. C. (2009). Critical citizens and submissive subjects: Election losers and winners in Africa. British Journal of Political Science, 39(2), 345–366. doi:10.1017/S0007123408000513
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Norris, P. (2012). Making democratic governance work: How regimes shape prosperity, welfare, and peace. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Peffley, M., & Rohrschneider, R. (2014). The multiple bases of democratic support: Procedural representation and governmental outputs. In J. Thomassen (Ed.), Elections and democracy: Representation and accountability (pp. 181–200). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Rothstein, B. (2009). Creating political legitimacy: Electoral government versus quality of government. American Behavioral Scientist, 53(3), 311–330. doi:10.1177/0002764209338795
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rothstein, B. (2011). The quality of government: corruption, social trust, and inequality in international perspective. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Rothstein, B., & Teorell, J. (2008). What is quality of government? A theory of impartial government institutions. Governance, 21(2), 165–190. doi:10.1111/j.1468-0491.2008.00391.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rothstein, B., & Teorell, J. (2012). Defining and measuring quality of government. In S. Holmberg, & B. Rothstein (Eds.), Good government: The relevance of political science (pp. 13–39). Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.
   Google Scholar
• Scharpf, F. W. (1997). Economic integration, democracy and the welfare state. Journal of European Public Policy, 4(1), 18–36. doi:10.1080/135017697344217
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Singh, S., Lago, I., & Blais, A. (2011). Winning and competitiveness as determinants of political support. Social Science Quarterly, 92(3), 695–709. doi:10.1111/j.1540-6237.2011.00788.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van der Eijk, C., & Franklin, M. N. (1996). Choosing Europe? The European electorate and national politics in the face of union. Ann Arbour, MI: University of Michigan Press.
   Google Scholar
• Wagner, A. F., Schneider, F., & Halla, M. (2009). The quality of institutions and satisfaction with democracy in Western Europe — a panel analysis. European Journal of Political Economy, 25(1), 30–41. doi:10.1016/j.ejpoleco.2008.08.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• World Bank. (2013). World development indicators. Washington, DC: The World Bank Group. Published Online, January 24, 2013.
   Google Scholar