Institutional design and polarization. Do consensus democracies fare better in fighting polarization than majoritarian democracies?

Bibliography

• Abramowitz, Alan I., and Kyle L. Saunders. “Is Polarization a Myth?” Journal of Politics 70, no. 2 (2008): 542–555. doi:10.1017/S0022381608080493.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ACLED. “Data from: The Armed Conflict Location & Event Data Project: Dashboard. ACLED Data” [Dataset]. https://acleddata.com/dashboard/#/dashboard, 2022.
   Google Scholar
• Anderson, Christopher J., and Christine A. Guillory. “Political Institutions and Satisfaction with Democracy: A Cross-National Analysis of Consensus and Majoritarian Systems.” American Political Science Review 91, no. 1 (1997): 66–81.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Andrews, Josephine T., and Jeannette Money. “The Spatial Structure of Party Competition: Party Dispersion Within a Finite Policy Space.” British Journal of Political Science 39, no. 4 (2009): 805–824. doi:10.1017/S0007123409990172.
   Google Scholar
• Andeweg, Rudi. “Lijphart Versus Lijphart: The Cons of Consensus Democracy in Homogenous Societies.” Acta Politica 36, no. 2 (2001): 117–139.
   Google Scholar
• Arbatli, Ekim, and Dina Rosenberg. “United we Stand, Divided we Rule: How Political Polarization Erodes Democracy.” Democratization 28, no. 2 (2021): 285–307. doi:10.1080/13510347.2020.1818068.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Armingeon, Klaus, S. Engler, and L. Leemann. “Data from: Comparative Political Data Set 1960-2019” [Dataset]. https://www.cpds-data.org/.
   Google Scholar
• Baldassarri, Delia, and Peter Bearman. “Dynamics of Political Polarization.” American Sociological Review 72, no. 5 (2007): 784–811.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barber, Michael, and Nolan McCarty. “Causes and Consequences of Polarization.” In Solutions to Political Polarization in America, edited by Jane Mansbridge, and Cathie Jo Martin, 15–58. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2015. doi:10.1017/CBO9781316091906.002.
   Google Scholar
• Bogaards, Matthijs. “Comparative Political Regimes: Consensus and Majoritarian Democracy.” In Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Politics, edited by William Thompson. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2017. doi:10.1093/acrefore/9780190228637.013.65.
   Google Scholar
• Bogaards, Matthijs, Ludger Helms, and Arend Lijphart. “The Importance of Consociationalism for Twenty-First Century Politics and Political Science.” Swiss Political Science Review 25, no. 4 (2019): 341–356. doi:10.1111/spsr.12384.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boxell, Levi, Matthew Gentzkow, and Jesse M. Shapiro. “Cross-Country Trends in Affective Polarization.” National Bureau of Economic Research, Forthcoming. https://www.nber.org/papers/w26669.
   Google Scholar
• Bramson, Aaron, Patrick Grim, Daniel J. Singer, Steven Fisher, William Berger, Graham Sack, and Carissa Flocken. “Disambiguation of Social Polarization Concepts and Measures.” Journal of Mathematical Sociology 40, no. 2 (2016): 80–111. doi:10.1080/0022250X.2016.1147443.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brubaker, Roger, and Frederick Cooper. “Beyond “Identity.”.” Theory and Society 29, no. 1 (2000): 1–47. https://www.jstor.org/stable/3108478.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Caluwaerts, Didier, and Min Reuchamps. “Combining Federalism with Consociationalism: Is Belgian Consociational Federalism Digging its own Grave?” Ethnopolitics 14, no. 3 (2015): 277–295. doi:10.1080/17449057.2014.986866.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Caluwaerts, Didier, and Min Reuchamps. “Still Consociational? Belgian Democracy, 50 Years After ‘The Politics of Accommodation’.” Politics of the Low Countries 2, no. 1 (2020): 28–50.
   Google Scholar
• Coppedge, Michael, John Gerring, Carl Henrik Knutsen, Staffan I. Lindberg, Jan Teorell, Nazifa Alizada, David Altman, et al. “Data from: V-Dem Dataset v11.1” Varieties of Democracy (V-Dem) Project [Dataset], 2021a.
   Google Scholar
• Coppedge, Michael, John Gerring, Carl Henrik Knutsen, Staffan I. Lindberg, Jan Teorell, Nazifa Alizada, David Altman, et al. “Data from: V-Dem Methodology v11.1” Varieties of Democracy (V-Dem) Project [Dataset], 2021b.
   Google Scholar
• Coppedge, Michael, John Gerring, Carl Henrik Knutsen, Staffan I. Lindberg, Jan Teorell, Nazifa Alizada, David Altman, et al. “Data from: V-Dem Codebook v11.1” Varieties of Democracy (V-Dem) Project [Dataset], 2021c.
   Google Scholar
• Curini, Luigi, and Airo Hino. “Missing Links in Party-System Polarization: How Institutions and Voters Matter.” Journal of Politics 74, no. 2 (2012): 460–473. doi:10.1017/S0022381611001721.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dalton, Russel J. “The Quantity and the Quality of Party Systems: Party System Polarization, its Measurement, and its Consequences.” Comparative Political Studies 41, no. 7 (2008): 899–920. doi:10.1177/0010414008315860.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dimaggio, Paul, John Evans, and Bethany Bryson. “Have American’s Social Attitudes Become More Polarized?” American Journal of Sociology 102, no. 3 (1996): 690–755. https://about.jstor.org/terms.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dimant, Eugen. “Hate Trumps Love: The Impact of Political Polarization on Social Preferences”, Forthcoming. https://osf.io/auh4k/.
   Google Scholar
• Druckman, James N., and Matthew S. Levendusky. “What do we Measure When we Measure Affective Polarization?” Public Opinion Quarterly 83, no. 1 (2019): 114–122. doi:10.1093/poq/nfz003.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Druckman, James N., Erik Peterson, and Rune Slothuus. “How Elite Partisan Polarization Affects Public Opinion Formation.” American Political Science Review 107, no. 1 (2013): 57–79. doi:10.1017/S0003055412000500.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Enders, Adam M., and Miles T. Armaly. “The Differential Effects of Actual and Perceived Polarization.” Political Behavior 41, no. 3 (2019): 815–839. doi:10.1007/s11109-018-9476-2.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Erk, Jan, and Lawrence Anderson, eds. The Paradox of Federalism: Does Self-Rule Accommodate or Exacerbate Ethnic Divisions? Abingdon: Routledge, 2010.
   Google Scholar
• Esteban, Joan, and Gerald Schneider. “Polarization and Conflict: Theoretical and Empirical Issues.” Journal of Peace Research 45, no. 2 (2008): 131–141. doi:10.1177/0022343307087168.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fang, Jianchun, Giray Gozgor, and Yan Cheng. “Does Globalisation Alleviate Polarisation?” The World Economy 44, no. 4 (2020): 1031–1052. doi:10.1111/twec.13048.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fiorina, Morris P., and Samual J. Abrams. “Political Polarization in the American Public.” Annual Review of Political Science 11 (2008): 563–588. doi:10.1146/annurev.polisci.11.053106.153836.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fishkin, James, Alice Siu, Larry Diamond, and Norman Bradburn. “Is Deliberation an Antidote to Extreme Partisan Polarization? Reflections on “America in One Room”.” American Political Science Review 115, no. 4 (2021): 1464–1481. doi:10.1017/S0003055421000642.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gallagher, Michael. “Proportionality, Disproportionality and Electoral Systems.” Electoral Studies 10, no. 1 (1991): 33–51. doi:10.1016/0261-3794(91)90004-C.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gidron, Noam, James Adams, and Will Horne. “How Ideology, Economics and Institutions Shape Affective Polarization in Democratic Polities.” Paper presented at the Annual Confference of the American Political Science Association, August 2018. https://www.dw.com/en/frank-walter-steinmeier-our-democracy-is-as-strong-as-we-make-it/a-46849802.
   Google Scholar
• Hakhverdian, Armèn, and Christel Koop. “Consensus Democracy and Support for Populist Parties in Western Europe.” Acta Politica 42, no. 4 (2007): 401–420. doi:10.1057/palgrave.ap.5500202.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harteveld, Eelco. “Ticking all the Boxes? A Comparative Study of Social Sorting and Affective Polarization.” Electoral Studies 72 (2021. doi:10.1016/j.electstud.2021.102337.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hibbing, John R. “Tribes and Proto-Tribes: The Deep Roots of Political Differences.” The Forum 19: 395–414. doi:10.1515/for-2021-0021.
   Google Scholar
• Hobolt, Sara B., and Julian M. Hoerner. “The Mobilising Effect of Political Choice.” European Journal of Political Research 59, no. 2 (2019): 229–247. doi:10.1111/1475-6765.12353.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Horowitz, Donald L. Ethnic Groups in Conflict. London: University of California Press, 1985.
   Google Scholar
• Horowitz, Donald L. Ethnic Groups in Conflict, Updated Edition with a New Preface. London: University of California Press, 2000.
   Google Scholar
• Iyengar, Shanto, Yphtach Lelkes, Matthew Levendusky, Neil Malhotra, and Sean J. Westwood. “The Origins and Consequences of Affective Polarization in the United States.” Annual Review of Political Science 22 (2019): 129–146. doi:10.1146/annurev-polisci-051117-073034.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Iyengar, Shanto, Gaurav Sood, and Yphtach Lelkes. “Affect, not Ideology: A Social Identity Perspective on Polarization.” Public Opinion Quarterly 76, no. 3 (2012): 405–431. doi:10.1093/poq/nfs038.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Iyengar, Shanto, and Sean J. Westwood. “Fear and Loathing Across Party Lines: New Evidence on Group Polarization.” American Journal of Political Science 59, no. 3 (2015): 690–707. doi:10.1111/ajps.12152.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jackson, John E. “Endogeneity and Structural Equation Estimation in Political Science.” In The Oxford Handbook of Political Methodology, edited by Janet M. Box-Steffensmeier, Henry E. Brady, and David Collier, 404–431. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008.
   Google Scholar
• Jarstad, Anna K. “The Prevalence of Power-Sharing: Exploring the Patterns of Post-Election Peace.” Africa Spectrum 44, no. 3 (2009): 41–62. doi:10.1177/000203970904400303.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Keele, Luke, and Nathan Kelly. “Dynamic Models for Dynamic Theories: The Ins and Outs of Lagged Dependent Variables.” Political Analysis 14, no. 2 (2006): 186–205. doi:10.1093/pan/mpj006.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kingzette, Jon, James N. Druckman, Samara Klar, Yanna Krupnikov, Matthew Levendusky, and John Barry Ryan. “How Affective Polarization Undermines Support for Democratic Norms.” Public Opinion Quarterly 85, no. 2 (2021): 663–677. doi:10.1093/poq/nfab029.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kleinfeld, Rachel. “The Rise of Political Violence in the United States.” Journal of Democracy 32, no. 4 (2021): 160–176. doi:10.1353/jod.2021.0059.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kolev, Kiril. “The Contingent Effect of Institutions: Electoral Formulas, Ethnic Polarization, and Election Quality.” Electoral Studies 35 (2014): 200–214. doi:10.1016/j.electstud.2014.01.004.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kriesi, Hanspeter, Edgar Grande, Romain Lachat, Martin Dolezal, Simon Bornschier, and Thimoteos Frey. West European Politics in the Age of Globalization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2008.
   Google Scholar
• Laakso, Markku, and Rein Taagepera. “Effective” Number of Parties: A Measure with Application to West Europe.”.” Comparative Political Studies 12, no. 1 (1979): 3–27. doi:10.1177/001041407901200101.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lelkes, Yphtach. “The Polls-Review: Mass Polarization: Manifestations and Measurements.” Public Opinion Quarterly 80, no. 1 (2016): 392–410. doi:10.1093/poq/nfw005.
   Google Scholar
• Levendusky, Matthew S, and Neil Malhotra. “(MIS)Perceptions of Partisan Polarization in the American Public.” Public Opinion Quarterly 80, no. 1 (2016): 378–391. doi:10.1093/poq/nfv045.
   Google Scholar
• Lijphart, Arend. Thinking About Democracy: Power Sharing and Majority Rule in Theory and Practice. London: Routledge, 2008.
   Google Scholar
• Lijphart, Arend. Patterns of Democracy: Government Forms and Performance in Thirty six Countries. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1999.
   Google Scholar
• Lijphart, Arend. Patterns of Democracy. Government Forms and Performance in Thirty-six Countries. 2nd ed. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2012.
   Google Scholar
• Lindell, Marina, André Bächtiger, Kimmo Grönlund, Kaisa Herne, Maija Setälä, and Dominik Wyss. “What Drives the Polarisation and Moderation of Opinions? Evidence from a Finnish Citizen Deliberation Experiment on Immigration.” European Journal of Political Research 56, no. 1 (2017): 23–45. doi:10.1111/1475-6765.12162.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lindqvist, Erik, and Robert Östling. “Political Polarization and the Size of Government.” American Political Science Review 104, no. 3 (2010): 543–565. doi:10.1017/S0003055410000262.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Luttig, Matthew D. “The “Prejudiced Personality” and the Origins of Partisan Strength, Affective Polarization, and Partisan Sorting.” Political Psychology 39, no. 1 (2018): 239–256. doi:10.1111/pops.12484.
   Google Scholar
• Mason, Lilliana. ““I Disrespectfully Agree”: The Differential Effects of Partisan Sorting on Social and Issue Polarization.” American Journal of Political Science 59, no. 1 (2014): 128–145. doi:10.1111/ajps.12089.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McCoy, Jennifer, Tahmina Rahman, and Murat Somer. “Polarization and the Global Crisis of Democracy: Common Patterns, Dynamics, and Pernicious Consequences for Democratic Polities.” American Behavioral Scientist 62, no. 1 (2018): 16–42. doi:10.1177/0002764218759576.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McCoy, Jennifer, and Murat Somer. “Toward a Theory of Pernicious Polarization and How It Harms Democracies: Comparative Evidence and Possible Remedies.” Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 681, no. 1 (2019): 234–271. doi:10.1177/0002716218818782.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mechkova, Valeriya, Dan Pemstein, Brigitte Seim, and Steven LIoyd Wilson. “Measuring Internet Politics: Introducing the Digital Society Project”, Forthcoming. http://digitalsocietyproject.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/DSP_WP_01 Introducingthe-Digital-Society-Project.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Merkel, Wolfgang. “Kosmopolitismus versus Kommunitarismus: Ein neuer Konflikt in der Demokratie.” In Parties, Governments and Elites, edited by Philipp Harfst, Ina Kubbe, and Thomas Poguntke, 9–23. Wiesbaden: Springer, 2017. doi:10.1007/978-3-658-17446-0_2.
   Google Scholar
• Mishra, Pankaj. Age of Anger: A History of the Present. New York: Farrar, Straus, and Giroux, 2017.
   Google Scholar
• Papadopoulos, Yannis. “Cooperative Forms of Governance: Problems of Democratic Accountability in Complex Environments.” European Journal of Political Research 42, no. 4 (2003): 473–501. doi:10.1111/1475-6765.00093.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pausch, Markus. “Polarisation in Pluralist Democracies. Considerations About a Complex Phenomenon.” European Forum for Urban Security, Paris, July 2020a.
   Google Scholar
• Pausch, Markus. “Democratic Innovations Against Polarisation in Europe.” In Perspectives for Europe. Historical Concepts and Future Challenges, edited by Markus Pausch, 127–150. Baden-Baden: Nomos, 2020b. doi:10.5771/9783748900092-127.
   Google Scholar
• Pausch, Markus. “The Future of Polarization in Europe: Relative Cosmopolitanism and Democracy.” European Journal of Futures Research 9, no. 1 (2021): 1–11. doi:10.1186/s40309-021-00183-2.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pemstein, Daniel, Kyle L. Marquardt, Eitan Tzelgov, Yi-ting Wang, Juraj Medzihorsky, Joshua Krusell, Farhad Miri, and Johannes von Römer. “The V-Dem Measurement Model: Latent Variable Analysis for Cross-National and Cross-Temporal Expert-Coded Data”, Forthcoming. https://deliverypdf.ssrn.com/delivery.php?ID = 321102020088087125093087111030102069021063020068087078105085028089003093108099112119059058002121107109114089102107075120089017050009068002021115001114109021000126029090058030122024097114025076126071065078086122090027110005096011119000088094094072083114&EXT = pdf&INDEX = TRUE.
   Google Scholar
• Raleigh, Clionadh, Andrew Linke, Havard Hegre, and Joakim Karlsen. “Introducing ACLED: An Armed Conflict Location and Event Dataset.” Journal of Peace Research 47, no. 5 (2010): 651–660. doi:10.1177/0022343310378914.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rapp, Carolin. “Moral Opinion Polarization and the Erosion of Trust.” Social Science Research 58 (2016): 34–45. doi:10.1016/j.ssresearch.2016.02.008.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reiljan, Andres. “Fear and Loathing Across Party Lines’ (Also) in Europe: Affective Polarisation in European Party Systems.” European Journal of Political Research 59, no. 2 (2020): 376–396. doi:10.1111/1475-6765.12351.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reilly, Ben. Democracy in Divided Societies: Electoral Engineering for Conflict Management. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001.
   Google Scholar
• Reilly, Ben. “Institutional Designs for Diverse Democracies: Consociationalism, Centripetalism and Communalism Compared.” European Political Science 11, no. 2 (2012): 259–270. doi:10.1057/eps.2011.36.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reynal-Querol, Marta. “Does Democracy Preempt Civil Wars?” European Journal of Political Economy 21, no. 2 (2005): 445–465. doi:10.1016/j.ejpoleco.2004.08.003.
   Google Scholar
• Roeder, Philip G, and Donald Rothchild, eds. Sustainable Peace: Power and Democracy After Civil Wars. London: Cornell University Press, 2005.
   Google Scholar
• Rogowski, Jon C., and Joseph L. Sutherland. “How Ideology Fuels Affective Polarization.” Political Behavior 38, no. 2 (2016): 485–508. doi:10.1007/s11109-015-9323-7.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scharpf, Fritz W. “The Joint-Decision Trap: Lessons from German Federalism and European Integration.” Public Administration 66, no. 3 (1988): 239–278. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9299.1988.tb00694.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schneider, Gerald, and Nina Wiesehomeier. “Rules That Matter: Political Institutions and the Diversity-Conflict Nexus.” Journal of Peace Research 45, no. 2 (2008): 183–203. doi:10.1177/0022343307087176.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shakespeare, Stephan, and Joel Rogers de Waal. “Be Reassured: The World is Not as Divided as we Might Think.” The Guardian, November 26, 2021. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/nov/26/world-divided-black-lives-matter-climate-feminism.
   Google Scholar
• Somer, Murat, and Jennifer McCoy. “Déjà vu? Polarization and Endangered Democracies in the 21st Century.” American Behavioral Scientist 62, no. 1 (2018): 3–15. doi:10.1177/0002764218760371.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Somer, Murat, Jennifer L. McCoy, and Russel E. Luke. “Pernicious Polarization, Autocratization and Opposition Strategies.” Democratization 28, no. 5 (2021): 929–948. doi:10.1080/13510347.2020.1865316.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tajfel, Henri, and John Turner. “An Integrative Theory of Intergroup Conflict.” Chap. 3 in The Social Psychology of Intergroup Relation, edited by Willem G. Austin and Stephen Worchel. Monterey: Brooks Cole, (1979): 94–109.
   Google Scholar
• Tappin, Ben, and Ryan McKay. “Moral Polarization and out-Party Hostility in the US Political Context.” Journal of Social and Political Psychology 7, no. 1 (2019): 213–245. doi:10.5964/jspp.v7i1.1090.
   Google Scholar
• Tierney, Stephen. “Federalism in a Unitary State: A Paradox Too far?” Regional & Federal Studies 19, no. 2 (2009): 237–253. doi:10.1080/13597560902753511.
   Google Scholar
• Van Spanje, Joost, and Nan Dirk de Graaf. “How Established Parties Reduce Other Parties’ Electoral Support: The Strategy of Parroting the Pariah.” West European Politics 41, no. 1 (2018): 1–27.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wagner, Markus. “Affective Polarization in Multiparty Systems.” Electoral Studies 69 (2021): 1–43. doi:10.1016/j.electstud.2020.102199.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wilkins, Arjun S. “To Lag or Not to Lag?: Re-Evaluating the Use of Lagged Dependent Variables in Regression Analysis.” Political Science Research and Methods 6, no. 2 (2018): 393–411. doi:10.1017/psrm.2017.4.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar