Emotions, cognitions and moderation: understanding losers’ consent in the 2016 Brexit referendum

References

• Alvarez, R. Michael, and John Brehm. 2002. Hard Choices, Easy Answers: Values, Information, and American Public Opinion. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Anderson, Christopher, André Blais, Shaun Bowler, Todd Donovan, and Ola Listhaugh. 2005. Losers’ Consent: Elections and Democratic Legitimacy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Anderson, Christopher J., and Christine A. Guillori. 1997. “Political Institutions and Satisfaction with Democracy: A Cross-National Analysis of Consensus and Majoritarian Systems.” American Political Science Review 91: 66–81. doi: 10.2307/2952259
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anderson, Christopher J., and Andrew J. LoTempio. 2002. “Winning, Losing and Political Trust in America.” British Journal of Political Science 32: 335–351. doi: 10.1017/S0007123402000133
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anderson, Christopher J., and Silvia M. Mendes. 2006. “Learning to Lose: Election Outcomes, Democratic Experience and Political Protest Potential.” British Journal of Political Science 36: 91–111. doi: 10.1017/S0007123406000056
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anderson, Christopher J., and Yuliya Tverdova. 2001. “Winners, Losers, and Attitudes About Government in Cotemporary Democracies.” International Political Science Review 22: 321–338. doi: 10.1177/0192512101022004003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Atikcan, Ece Ozlem. 2015a. Framing the European Union: The Power of Political Arguments in Shaping European Integration. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Atikcan, Ece Ozlem. 2015b. “The Puzzle of Double Referendums in the European Union.” Journal of Common Market Studies 53: 937–956. doi: 10.1111/jcms.12239
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Atkinson, John W. 1957. “Motivational Determinants of Risk-taking Behavior.” Psychological Review 64: 585–591. doi: 10.1037/h0043445
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Banducci, Susan A., and Jeffrey A. Karp. 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: 443–467. doi: 10.1017/S000712340300019X
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beggan, James K., and Scott T. Allison. 1993. “The Landslide Victory That Wasn’t: The Bias Toward Consistency in Recall of Election Support.” Journal of Applied Social Psychology 23: 669–677. doi: 10.1111/j.1559-1816.1993.tb01108.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Blais, André, and François Gélineau. 2007. “Winning, Losing and Satisfaction with Democracy.” Political Studies 55: 425–441. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9248.2007.00659.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Blais, André, Alexandre Morin-Chassé, and Shane Singh. 2017. “Election Outcomes, Legislative Representation, and Satisfaction with Democracy.” Party Politics 23: 85–95. doi: 10.1177/1354068815583200
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bowler, Shaun. 2016. “I Study Democracies, and what I’ve Learned is this: They Collapse without Graceful Losers.” Vox.com, October 14.
   Google Scholar
• Brunell, Thomas J., and Justin Buchler. 2009. “Ideological Representation and Competitive Congressional Elections.” Electoral Studies 28: 448–457. doi: 10.1016/j.electstud.2009.05.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cigler, Allan J., and Russell Getter. 1977. “Conflict Resolution in the Post-election Period: A Test of the Depolarization Thesis.” The Western Political Quarterly 30: 363–376. doi: 10.1177/106591297703000306
   Google Scholar
• Coleman, William D. 1988. Business and Politics: A Study in Collective Action. Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Craig, Stephen C., Michael D. Martinez, Jason Gainous, and James G. Kane. 2006. “Winners, Losers, and Election Context: Voter Responses to the 2000 Presidential Election.” Political Research Quarterly 59: 579–592. doi: 10.1177/106591290605900407
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Curini, Luigi, Willy Jou, and Vincenzo Memoli. 2012. “Satisfaction with Democracy and the Winner/Loser Debate: The Role of Policy Preferences and Past Experience.” British Journal of Political Science 42: 241–261. doi: 10.1017/S0007123411000275
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dahl, Robert. 1989. Democracy and its Critics. New Haven: Yale University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Delli, Carpini, X. Michael, and Scott Keeter. 1996. What Americans Know about Politics and Why it Matters. New Haven: Yale University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Esaiasson, Peter. 2011. “Electoral Losers Revisited: How Citizens React to Defeat at the Ballot Box.” Electoral Studies 30: 102–113. doi: 10.1016/j.electstud.2010.09.009
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ezrow, Lawrence, and Georgios Xezonakis. 2011. “Citizen Satisfaction with Democracy and Party Policy Offerings.” Comparative Political Studies 44: 1152–1178. doi: 10.1177/0010414011405461
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Festinger, Leon. 1957. A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Frenkel, Oden, and Anthony Doob. 1976. “Postdecision Dissonance at the Polling Booth.” Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science/Revue Canadienne des Sciences du Comportement 8: 347–350. doi: 10.1037/h0081960
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Funder, David C., and Randall Colvin. 1991. “Explorations in Behavioral Consistency: Properties of Persons, Situations, and Behaviors.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 60: 773–794. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.60.5.773
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gopoian, J. David, and Sissie Hadjiharalambous. 1994. “Late-Deciding Voters in Presidential Elections.” Political Behavior 16: 55–78. doi: 10.1007/BF01541642
   Google Scholar
• Granberg, Donald. 1993. “Political Perception.” In Explorations in Political Psychology, edited by Shanto Iyengar and William J. McGuire, 70–112. Durham: Duke University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Greene, William H. 2003. Econometric Analysis. 5th ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
   Google Scholar
• Hansard. 2015. UK House of Commons Debates, vol. 596, col. 1056, June 9.
   Google Scholar
• Harley, Nicola. 2016. “Brexit: Government Rejects Petition Signed by 4 Million Calling for Second EU Referendum.” The Telegraph, July 9.
   Google Scholar
• Hobolt, Sara Binzer. 2006. “Direct Democracy and European Integration.” Journal of European Public Policy 13: 153–166. doi: 10.1080/13501760500380825
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Howell, Patrick, and Florian Justwan. 2013. “Nail-Bitters and No-contests: The Effect of Electoral Margins on Satisfaction with Democracy in Winners and Losers.” Electoral Studies 32: 334–343. doi: 10.1016/j.electstud.2013.02.004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jackson, Daniel, Einar Thorsen, and Dominic Wring, eds. 2016. EU Referendum Analysis 2016: Media, Voters and the Campaign. Loughborough: Loughborough University, Centre for Research in Communication and Culture.
   Google Scholar
• Johnston, Richard, André Blais, Elisabeth Gidengil, and Neil Nevitte. 1996. The Challenge of Direct Democracy. Montreal and Kingston: McGill-Queens’s University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Joslyn, Mark R. 1998. “Opinion Change After the Election.” Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Boston, September.
   Google Scholar
• Kim, Myunghee. 2009. “Cross-National Analyses of Satisfaction with Democracy and Ideological Congruence.” Journal of Elections, Public Opinion and Parties 19: 49–72. doi: 10.1080/17457280802568402
   Google Scholar
• Lavine, Howard. 2001. “The Electoral Consequences of Ambivalence Toward Presidential Candidates.” American Journal of Political Science 45: 915–929. doi: 10.2307/2669332
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Loewen, Peter, and André Blais. 2006. “Testing Publius’ Federalism: Losers’ Consent, Winners’ Lament?” Paper prepared for the Conference on the Comparative Study of Electoral Systems, Seville, Spain, March 23.
   Google Scholar
• Lupia, Arthur, and Mathew D. McCubbins. 1998. The Democratic Dilemma: Can Citizens Learn What They Need To Know? Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Marcus, George E., and Michael MacKuen. 1993. “Anxiety, Enthusiasm and the Vote: The Emotional Underpinnings of Learning and Involvement During Presidential Campaigns.” American Political Science Review 87: 672–685. doi: 10.2307/2938743
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marcus, George E., Russell W. Neuman, and Michael MacKuen. 2000. Affective Intelligence and Political Judgments. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• McClelland, David C. 1987. Human Motivation. New York: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• McGuire, William J. 1968. “Theory of the Structure of Human Thought.” In Theories of Cognitive Consistency: A Sourcebook, edited by Robert P. Abelson, 140–162. Chicago: Rand McNally.
   Google Scholar
• Moehler, Devra C. 2009. “Critical Citizens and Submissive Subjects: Election Losers and Winners in Africa.” British Journal of Political Science 39: 345–366. doi: 10.1017/S0007123408000513
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nadeau, Richard, and André Blais. 1993. “The Effect of Participation on Losers’ Consent.” British Journal of Political Science 23: 553–563. doi: 10.1017/S0007123400006736
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nadeau, Richard, Neil Nevitte, Elisabeth Gidengil, and André Blais. 2008. “Election Campaigns as Information Campaigns: Who Learns What and Does it Matter?” Political Communication 25: 229–248. doi: 10.1080/10584600802197269
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nadeau, Richard, Richard G. Niemi, and Timothy Amato. 1995. “Emotions, Issue Importance and Political Learning.” American Journal of Political Science 39: 558–574. doi: 10.2307/2111644
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Neuman, Russell W., George E. Marcus, Michael MacKuen, and Ann C. Crigler. 2007. The Affect Effect: Dynamics of Emotions in Political Thinking and Behavior. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Price, Vincent, and John R. Zaller. 1993. “Who Gets the News? Alternative Measures of News Reception and Their Implications for Research.” Public Opinion Quarterly 57: 133–164. doi: 10.1086/269363
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Przeworski, Adam. 1991. Democracy and the Market. Political and Economic Reforms in Eastern Europe and Latin America. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Regan, Dennis T., and Martin Kilduff. 1988. “Optimism After Elections: Dissonance Reduction at the Ballot Box.” Political Psychology 9: 101–107. doi: 10.2307/3791319
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rich, Timothy S. 2015. “Losers’ Consent or Non-Voter Consent? Satisfaction with Democracy in East Asia.” Asian Journal of Political Science 23: 243–259. doi: 10.1080/02185377.2015.1073163
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rich, Timothy S., and Mallory Treece. 2018. “Losers’ and Non-voters’ Consent: Democratic Satisfaction in the 2009 and 2013 Elections in Germany.” Government and Opposition 53: 416–436. doi: 10.1017/gov.2016.29
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rose, Richard, and Gabriela Borz. 2013. “What Determines Demand for European Union Referendums?” Journal of European Integration 35: 619–633. doi: 10.1080/07036337.2013.799938
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shipman, Tim. 2017. Fall Out: A Year of Political Mayhem. London: William Collins.
   Google Scholar
• Siddique, Haroon. 2016. “Is the EU Referendum Legally Binding?” The Guardian, June 23.
   Google Scholar
• Singh, Shane, Ekrem Karakoç, and André Blais. 2012. “Differentiating Winners: How Elections Affect Satisfaction with Democracy.” Electoral Studies 31: 201–211. doi: 10.1016/j.electstud.2011.11.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sniderman, Paul M., Richard A. Brody, and Philip E. Tetlock. 1991. Reasoning and Choice: Explorations in Political Psychology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Thaler, Richard. 1994. The Winner’s Curse: Paradoxes and Anomalies of Economic Life. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Willocq, Simon. 2019. “Explaining Time of Vote Decision: The Socio-Structural, Attitudinal, and Contextual Determinants of Late Deciding.” Political Studies Review 17: 53–64. doi: 10.1177/1478929917748484
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zaller, John R. 1992. The Nature and Origins and Mass Opinion. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar