Ballot Structure and Satisfaction with Democracy

References

• Aarts, K. & Thomassen, J. (2008) Satisfaction with democracy: do institutions matter? Electoral Studies, 27, pp. 5–18. doi: 10.1016/j.electstud.2007.11.005
   Google Scholar
• Ames, B. (1995) Electoral strategy under open-list proportional representation. American Journal of Political Science, 39, pp. 406–433. doi: 10.2307/2111619
   Google Scholar
• Anderson, C. & Guillory, C. (1997) Political institutions and satisfaction with democracy: a cross-national analysis of consensus and majoritarian systems. American Political Science Review, 91, pp. 66–81. doi: 10.2307/2952259
   Google Scholar
• Birch, S. (2010) Perceptions of electoral fairness and voter turnout. Comparative Politcal Studies, 43, pp. 1601–1622. doi: 10.1177/0010414010374021
   Google Scholar
• Blais, A. (1988) The classification of electoral systems. European Journal of Political Research, 16, pp. 99–110. doi: 10.1111/j.1475-6765.1988.tb00143.x
   Google Scholar
• Blais, A. and Gélineau, F. (2007) Winning, losing and satisfaction with democracy. Political Studies, 55, pp. 425–441. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9248.2007.00659.x
   Google Scholar
• Bowler, S., Farrell, D. & Pettitt, R. (2005) Expert opinion on electoral systems: so which electoral system is “best"? Journal of Elections, Public Opinion & Parties, 15, pp. 3–19. doi: 10.1080/13689880500064544
   Google Scholar
• Brockington, D. (2003) Familiarity breeds contentment: contextual and individual determinants of democratic satisfaction in 34 democracies. Paper for the Midwestern PSA meeting. Chicago, April 3–6.
   Google Scholar
• Cannache, D., Mondak, J.J. & Seligson, M.A. (2001) Meaning and measurement in crossnational research on satisfaction with democracy. Public Opinion Quarterly, 65, pp. 506–528. doi: 10.1086/323576
   Google Scholar
• Carey, J. & Enten, H. (2011) Primary elections, in: J.M. Colomer (ed.) Personal Representation: The Neglected Dimension of Electoral Systems (Essex: ECPR Press) pp. 81–98.
   Google Scholar
• Carey, J. & Shugart, M. (1995) Incentives to cultivate a personal vote: a rank ordering of electoral formulas. Electoral Studies, 14, pp. 417–439. doi: 10.1016/0261-3794(94)00035-2
   Google Scholar
• Castles, F.G. (1994) The policy consequences of proportional representation: a sceptical commentary. Political Science, 46, pp. 161–171. doi: 10.1177/003231879404600202
   Google Scholar
• Colomer, J.M. (ed.) (2011) Personal Representation: The Neglected Dimension of Electoral Systems (Essex: ECPR Press).
   Google Scholar
• Curtice, J. & Shively, W.P. (2009) Who represents us best? One member or many? in: H.D. Klingemann (ed.) The Comparative Study of Electoral Systems (Oxford: Oxford University Press), pp. 171–192.
   Google Scholar
• Delli Carpini, M.X. & Keeter, S. (1996) What Americans Know About Politics and Why it Matters (New Haven: Yale University Press).
   Google Scholar
• Duverger, M. (1954) Political Parties: Their Organization and Activity in the Modern State (London: Methuen).
   Google Scholar
• Farrell, D. (2001) Electoral Systems (London: Palgrave Macmillan).
   Google Scholar
• Farrell, D. & McAllister, I. (2006) Voter satisfaction and electoral systems: does preferential voting in candidate-centred systems make a difference? European Journal of Political Research, 45, pp. 723–749. doi: 10.1111/j.1475-6765.2006.00633.x
   Google Scholar
• Fuchs, D. (1993) Trends of political support, in: D. Berg-Schlosser & R. Rytlewski (eds) Political Culture in Germany (New York: St. Martin's), pp. 232–268.
   Google Scholar
• Grönlund, K. & Milner, H. (2006) The determinants of political knowledge in comparative perspective. Scandinavian Political Studies, 29, pp. 386–406. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9477.2006.00157.x
   Google Scholar
• Karvonen, L. (2004) Preferential voting: incidence and effects. International Political Science Review, 25, pp. 203–226. doi: 10.1177/0192512104041283
   Google Scholar
• Lawson, K. (ed.) (1980) Political Parties and Linkage: A Comparative Perspective (New Haven: Yale University Press).
   Google Scholar
• Lijphart, A. (1994) Electoral Systems and Party Systems: A Study of Twenty-seven Democracies, 1945–1990 (New York: Oxford University Press).
   Google Scholar
• Lijphart, A. (1999) Patterns of Democracy: Government Forms and Performance in Thirty-six Countries (New Haven: Yale University Press).
   Google Scholar
• Lijphart, A. & Grofman, B. (1984) Choosing an Electoral System (New York: Praeger).
   Google Scholar
• Listhaug, O., Aardal, B. & Ellis, I.O. (2009) Institutional variation and political support: an analysis of CSES data from 29 countries, in: H.D. Klingemann (ed.) The Comparative Study of Electoral Systems (Oxford: Oxford University Press), pp. 311–332.
   Google Scholar
• Luskin, R.C. (1990) Explaining political sophistication. Political Behavior, 12, pp. 331–361. doi: 10.1007/BF00992793
   Google Scholar
• Margetts, H. (2011) Single seat, in: J.M. Colomer (ed.) Personal Representation: The Neglected Dimension of Electoral Systems (Essex: ECPR Press), pp. 37–54.
   Google Scholar
• Marsh, M. (2011) Ordinal rank, in: J.M. Colomer (ed.) Personal Representation: The Neglected Dimension of Electoral Systems (Essex: ECPR Press), pp. 135–152.
   Google Scholar
• Mitchell, P. (2000) Voters and their representatives: electoral institutions and delegation in parliamentary democracies. European Journal of Political Research, 37, pp. 335–351.
   Google Scholar
• Nadeau, R. & Blais, A. (1993) Explaining election outcomes in Canada: economy and politics. Canadian Journal of Political Science, 26, pp. 775–790. doi: 10.1017/S0008423900000470
   Google Scholar
• Norris, P. (1999) Critical Citizens: Global Support for Democratic Governance (Oxford: Oxford University Press).
   Google Scholar
• Pereira, P.T. & Andrade Silva, J. (2009) Citizens’ freedom to choose representatives: ballot structure, proportionality and “fragmented” parliaments. Electoral Studies, 28, pp. 101–110. doi: 10.1016/j.electstud.2008.07.005
   Google Scholar
• Rae, D.W. (1967) The Political Consequences of Electoral Laws (New Haven: Yale University Press).
   Google Scholar
• Römmele, A., Farrell, D. & Ignazi, P. (eds) (2005) Political Parties and Political Systems: The Concept of Linkage Revisited (Westport: Greenwood/Praeger).
   Google Scholar
• Rose, R. (1992) What are the Economic Consequences of PR? (London: Electoral Reform Society).
   Google Scholar
• Shugart, M. (2001) Electoral “efficiency” and the move to mixed-member systems. Electoral Studies, 20, pp. 173–193. doi: 10.1016/S0261-3794(00)00007-X
   Google Scholar
• Singh, S. & Thornton, J. (2012) Compulsory voting and the dynamics of partisan identification. European Journal of Political Research, 52, pp. 188–211. doi: 10.1111/j.1475-6765.2012.02071.x
   Google Scholar
• Singh, S., Lago, I. & Blais, A. (2011) Winning and competitiveness as determinants of political support. Social Science Quarterly, 92, pp. 695–709. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-6237.2011.00788.x
   Google Scholar
• Steenbergen, R.M. & Jones, B.S. (2002) Modeling mulitlevel data structures. American Journal of Political Science, 46, pp. 218–237. doi: 10.2307/3088424
   Google Scholar
• Taagepera, R. & Shugart, M. (1989) Seats and Votes: The Effects and Determinants of Electoral Systems (New Haven: Yale University Press).
   Google Scholar
• Tóka, G. (2009) Expressive versus instrumental motivation of turnout, partisanship, and political learning, in: H.-D. Klingemann (ed.) The Comparative Study of Electoral Systems (Oxford: Oxford University Press), pp. 269–288.
   Google Scholar
• Zaller, J.R. (1992) The Nature and Origins of Mass Opinions (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).
   Google Scholar