Does constituency focus improve attitudes to MPs? A test for the UK

References

• Amsalem, E., Sheafer, T., Walgrave, S., Loewen, P. J., & Soroka, S. N. (2017). Media motivation and elite rhetoric in comparative perspective. Political Communication, 34(3), 385–403. doi: 10.1080/10584609.2016.1266065
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• André, A., DePauw, S., & Andeweg, R. B. (2018). Public and politicians’ preferences on priorities in political representation. In K. Deschouwer (Ed.), Mind the gap: Political participation and representation in Belgium (pp. 51–73). London: Rowman & Littlefield Int./ECPR Press.
   Google Scholar
• André, A., Depauw, S., & Martin, S. (2015). Electoral systems and legislators’ constituency effort: The mediating effect of electoral vulnerability. Comparative Political Studies, 48(4), 464–496. doi: 10.1177/0010414014545512
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• André, A., Gallagher, M., & Sandri, G. (2014). Legislators’ constituency orientation. In K. Deschouwer & S. Depauw (Eds.), Representing the people: A survey among members of statewide and substate parliaments (pp. 166–187). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Arnold, R. D. (1993). Can inattentive citizens control their elected representatives? In L. C. Dodd & B. I. Oppenheimer (Eds.), Congress reconsidered (pp. 401–416). Washington, DC: CQ Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bengtsson, Å, & Wass, H. (2011). The representative roles of MPs: A citizen perspective. Scandinavian Political Studies, 34(2), 143–167. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9477.2011.00267.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Besley, T., & Larcinese, V. (2011). Working or shirking? Expenses and attendance in the UK Parliament. Public Choice, 146(3), 291–317. doi: 10.1007/s11127-009-9591-z
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Blidook, K., & Kerby, M. (2011). Constituency influence on ‘constituency members’: The adaptability of roles to electoral realities in the Canadian case. The Journal of Legislative Studies, 17(3), 327–339. doi: 10.1080/13572334.2011.595125
   Google Scholar
• Bond, J. R. (1985). Dimensions of district attention over time. American Journal of Political Science, 29, 330–347. doi: 10.2307/2111170
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bowler, S. (2010). Private members’ bills in the UK Parliament: Is there an ‘electoral connection’? The Journal of Legislative Studies, 16(4), 476–494. doi: 10.1080/13572334.2010.519457
   Google Scholar
• Bowler, S., & Farrell, D. M. (1993). Legislator shirking and voter monitoring: Impacts of European Parliament electoral systems upon legislator-voter relationships. JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies, 31(1), 45–70.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Box-Steffensmeier, J. M., Kimball, D. C., Meinke, S. R., & Tate, K. (2003). The effects of political representation on the electoral advantages of house incumbents. Political Research Quarterly, 56(3), 259–270. doi: 10.1177/106591290305600302
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Branton, R. P., Cassese, E. C., & Jones, B. S. (2012). Race, ethnicity, and U.S. House incumbent evaluations. Legislative Studies Quarterly, 37(4), 465–489. doi: 10.1111/j.1939-9162.2012.00058.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brouard, S., Kerrouche, E., Deiss-Helbig, E., & Costa, O. (2013). From theory to practice: Citizens’ attitudes about representation in France. The Journal of Legislative Studies, 19(2), 178–195. doi: 10.1080/13572334.2013.787196
   Google Scholar
• Bulut, A. T., & İlter, E. (2018). Understanding legislative speech in the Turkish Parliament: Reconsidering the electoral connection under proportional representation. Parliamentary Affairs [early view].
   Google Scholar
• Cain, B. E., Ferejohn, J. A., & Fiorina, M. P. (1979). The roots of legislator popularity in Great Britain and the United States (Social Science Working Paper, 288). California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA.
   Google Scholar
• Cairncross, F. (2019). The cairncross review: A sustainable future for journalism. Unknown place of publication: Department for Culture, Media and Sport. [ Online]. Retrieved from https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/the-cairncross-review-a-sustainable-future-for-journalism
   Google Scholar
• Campbell, R., & Lovenduski, J. (2015). What should MPs do? Public and parliamentarians’ views compared. Parliamentary Affairs, 68(4), 690–708. doi: 10.1093/pa/gsu020
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carey, J. M., & Shugart, M. S. (1995). Incentives to cultivate a personal vote: A rank ordering of electoral formulas. Electoral Studies, 14(4), 417–439. doi: 10.1016/0261-3794(94)00035-2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chiru, M. (2018). The electoral value of constituency-oriented parliamentary questions in Hungary and Romania. Parliamentary Affairs, 71(4), 950–969. doi: 10.1093/pa/gsx050
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Costa, M., Johnson, K., & Schaffner, B. (2018). Rethinking representation from a communal perspective. Political Behavior, 40(2), 301–320. doi: 10.1007/s11109-017-9393-9
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Crewe, E. (2015). The House of Commons: An anthropology of MPs at work. London: Bloomsbury Academic.
   Google Scholar
• Deschouwer, K., Depauw, S., & André, A. (2014). Representing the people in parliaments. In K. Deschouwer & S. Depauw (Eds.), Representing the people: A survey among members of statewide and substate parliaments (pp. 1–18). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Dudzińska, A., Poyet, C., Costa, O., & Weßels, B. (2014). Representational roles. In K. Deschouwer & S. Depauw (Eds.), Representing the people: A survey among members of statewide and substate parliaments (pp. 19–38). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Edwards, A., de Kool, D., & van Ooijen, C. (2015). The information ecology of parliamentary monitoring websites: Pathways towards strengthening democracy. Information Polity, 20(4), 253–268. doi: 10.3233/IP-150372
   Google Scholar
• Fenno, R. F. (1978). Home style: House members in their districts. New York: HarperCollins.
   Google Scholar
• Fernandes, J. M., Leston-Bandeira, C., & Schwemmer, C. (2018). Election proximity and representation focus in party-constrained environments. Party Politics, 24(6), 674–685. doi: 10.1177/1354068817689955
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fiorina, M. P., & Rivers, D. (1989). Constituency service, reputation, and the incumbency advantage. In M. P. Fiorina & D. Rohde (Eds.), Home style and Washington work (pp. 17–45). Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
   Google Scholar
• Fox, R. (2012). Disgruntled, disillusioned and disengaged: Public attitudes to politics in Britain today. Parliamentary Affairs, 65(4), 877–887. doi: 10.1093/pa/gss053
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Franklin, B. (1996). Keeping it ‘bright, light and trite’: Changing newspaper reporting of Parliament. Parliamentary Affairs, 49(2), 298–315. doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.pa.a028681
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Franklin, M. N., & Norton, P. (1993). Parliamentary questions. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
   Google Scholar
• Frederick, B. (2008). Constituency population and representation in the U.S. House. American Politics Research, 36(3), 358–381. doi: 10.1177/1532673X07309740
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gay, C. (2002). Spirals of trust? The effect of descriptive representation on the relationship between citizens and their government. American Journal of Political Science, 46(4), 717–732. doi: 10.2307/3088429
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grant, J. T., & Rudolph, T. J. (2004). The job of representation in Congress: Public expectations and representative approval. Legislative Studies Quarterly, 29(3), 431–445. doi: 10.3162/036298004X201249
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grimmer, J., Messing, S., & Westwood, S. J. (2012). How words and money cultivate a personal vote: The effect of legislator credit claiming on constituent credit allocation. American Political Science Review, 106(4), 703–719. doi: 10.1017/S0003055412000457
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hansard Society. (2010). Audit of political engagement 7. London: Hansard Society.
   Google Scholar
• Hansard Society. (2014). Tuned in or turned off? Public attitudes to Prime Minister’s questions. London: Hansard Society.
   Google Scholar
• Hayes, D., & Lawless, J. L. (2018). The decline of local news and its effects: New evidence from longitudinal data. The Journal of Politics, 80(1), 332–336. doi: 10.1086/694105
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heitshusen, V., Young, G., & Wood, D. M. (2005). Electoral context and MP constituency focus in Australia, Canada, Ireland, New Zealand, and the United Kingdom. American Journal of Political Science, 49(1), 32–45. doi: 10.1111/j.0092-5853.2005.00108.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heppell, T., & Crines, A. (2016). Conservative ministers in the Coalition government of 2010–15: Evidence of bias in the ministerial selections of David Cameron? The Journal of Legislative Studies, 22(3), 385–403. doi: 10.1080/13572334.2016.1202647
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Holmberg, S. (2009). Candidate recognition in different electoral systems. In H.-D. Klingemann (Ed.), The comparative study of electoral systems (pp. 158–170). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• House of Commons Committee on Standards. (2013, October 15). Response to the IPSA consultation: MP's pay and pensions, HC 751 2013-14.
   Google Scholar
• Howells, R. (2015). Journey to the centre of a news black hole: examining the democratic deficit in a town with no newspaper (PhD Thesis). Cardiff University. Retrieved from https://repository.upenn.edu/edissertations/1036
   Google Scholar
• International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance. Electoral system design database. Retrieved from https://www.idea.int/data-tools/data/electoral-system-design
   Google Scholar
• Judge, D. (2014). Democratic incongruities: Representative democracy in Britain. London: Palgrave.
   Google Scholar
• Judge, D., & Partos, R. (2018). MPs and their constituencies. In C. Leston-Bandeira & L. Thompson (Eds.), Exploring parliament (pp. 264–273). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Karp, J. A., & Lühiste, M. (2016). Explaining political engagement with online panels. Public Opinion Quarterly, 80(3), 666–693. doi: 10.1093/poq/nfw014
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kellermann, M. (2013). Sponsoring early day motions in the British House of Commons as a response to electoral vulnerability. Political Science Research and Methods, 1(2), 263–280. doi: 10.1017/psrm.2013.19
   Google Scholar
• Kellermann, M. (2016). Electoral vulnerability, constituency focus, and parliamentary questions in the House of Commons. The British Journal of Politics and International Relations, 18(1), 90–106. doi: 10.1111/1467-856X.12075
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kelly, R. (2015, October 23). House business committee (House of Commons Library Briefing Paper 06394).
   Google Scholar
• Killermann, K., & Proksch, S.-O. (2013). Dynamic political rhetoric: Electoral, economic, and partisan determinants of speech-making in the UK Parliament. Paper presented at 7th ECPR General Conference 2013, Bordeaux, France.
   Google Scholar
• King, A., & Allen, N. (2010). ‘Off with their heads’: British Prime Ministers and the power to dismiss. British Journal of Political Science, 40(2), 249–278. doi: 10.1017/S000712340999007X
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lawless, J. L. (2004). Politics of presence? Congresswomen and symbolic representation. Political Research Quarterly, 57(1), 81–99. doi: 10.1177/106591290405700107
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leslie, P. A. (2018). Political behaviour in the United Kingdom: An examination of members of parliament and voters (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Essex, Colchester, England.
   Google Scholar
• Loewen, P., Koop, R., Settle, J., & Fowler, J. (2014). A natural experiment in proposal power and electoral success. American Journal of Political Science, 58(1), 189–196. doi: 10.1111/ajps.12042
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mandelbaum, A. G. (2011). Strengthening parliamentary accountability, citizen engagement and access to information: A global survey of parliamentary monitoring organizations. Washington, DC: National Democratic Institute and World Bank Institute.
   Google Scholar
• Martin, S. (2010). Electoral rewards for personal vote cultivation under PR-STV. West European Politics, 33(2), 369–380. doi: 10.1080/01402380903539003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martin, S. (2011). Using parliamentary questions to measure constituency focus: An application to the Irish case. Political Studies, 59(2), 472–488. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9248.2011.00885.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Middleton, A. (2019). The personal vote, electoral experience, and local connections: Explaining retirement underperformance at UK elections 1987–2010. Politics, 39(2), 137–153. doi: 10.1177/0263395718754717
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Midtbø, T., Walgrave, S., Van Aelst, P., & Christensen, D. (2014). Do the media set the agenda of parliament or is it the other way around? Agenda interactions between MPs and mass media. In K. Deschouwer & S. Depauw (Eds.), Representing the people: A survey among members of statewide and substate parliaments (pp. 188–208). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Navarro, J., & Francois, A. (2018, April 10–14). The missing link? Parliamentary work, citizens’ awareness and votes in French legislative elections. Nicosia: ECPR Joint Sessions University of Nicosia.
   Google Scholar
• Norris, P. (1997). The puzzle of constituency service. The Journal of Legislative Studies, 3(2), 29–49. doi: 10.1080/13572339708420508
   Google Scholar
• Parker, D. C., & Goodman, C. (2009). Making a good impression: Resource allocation, home styles, and Washington work. Legislative Studies Quarterly, 34(4), 493–524. doi: 10.3162/036298009789869709
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Poyet, C. (2014). Explaining MPs constituency orientation: A QCA approach. Paper presented at the 2014 American Political Science Association Annual Meeting. Retrieved from https://ssrn.com/abstract=2452549
   Google Scholar
• Rai, S., & Spary, C. (2019). Performing representation: Women members in the Indian parliament. New Delhi: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ramsay, G., & Moore, M. (2016). Monopolizing local news: Is there an emerging democratic deficit in the UK due to the decline of local newspapers? Report, CMCP, Policy Institute, King's College London.
   Google Scholar
• Rush, M., & Giddings, P. (2011). Parliamentary socialisation. London: Palgrave MacMillan.
   Google Scholar
• Saward, M. (2010). The representative claim. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Schaffner, B. F. (2006). Local news coverage and the incumbency advantage in the U.S. House. Legislative Studies Quarterly, 31(4), 491–511. doi: 10.3162/036298006X201904
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Searing, D. (1994). Westminster's world: Understanding political roles. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Soroka, S., Penner, E., & Blidook, K. (2009). Constituency influence in parliament. Canadian Journal of Political Science, 42(3), 563–591. doi: 10.1017/S0008423909990059
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Speaker’s Commission on Digital Democracy. (2013). Background to digital scrutiny. Retrieved from https://www.parliament.uk/business/commons/the-speaker/speakers-commission-on-digital-democracy/digital-scrutiny/background-to-digital-scrutiny/
   Google Scholar
• Stein, R., & Bickers, K. (1994). Congressional elections and the Pork Barrel. The Journal of Politics, 56(2), 377–399. doi: 10.2307/2132144
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sulkin, T., Testa, P., & Usry, K. (2015). What gets rewarded? Legislative activity and constituency approval. Political Research Quarterly, 68(4), 690–702. doi: 10.1177/1065912915608699
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thomas, S. (1992). The effects of race and gender on constituency service. The Western Political Quarterly, 45(1), 169–180. doi: 10.2307/448769
   Google Scholar
• Thompson, L. (2015). Making British law: Committees in action. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2015.
   Google Scholar
• Tinkler, J., & Mehta, N. (2016). Report to the House of Commons administration committee on the findings of the interview study with members on leaving parliament. London: Department of Information Services.
   Google Scholar
• Wagner, M. W. (2007). Beyond policy representation in the U.S. House: Partisanship, polarization, and citizens’ attitudes about casework. American Politics Research, 35(6), 771–789. doi: 10.1177/1532673X07299867
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zittel, T. (2017). The personal vote. In K. Arzheimer, J. Evans, & M. S. Lewis–Beck, (Eds.), The sage handbook of electoral behaviour (pp. 668–687). London: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• YouGov. (2013). YouGov/IPSA survey results [Data set].
   Google Scholar