Explaining legislative party discipline in a new democracy: the case of Lithuania

References

• Ames, B. 2002. The Deadlock of Democracy in Brazil. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
   Google Scholar
• Arnold, R. D. 1990. The Logic of Congressional Action. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bates, D., M. Maechler, B. Bolker, and S. Walker. 2015. “Fitting Linear Mixed-Effects Models Using lme4.” Journal of Statistical Software 67 (1): 1–48. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v067.i01.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Batto, N. F. 2012. “Differing Mandates and Party Loyalty in Mixed-Member Systems: Taiwan as a Baseline Case.” Electoral Studies 31 (2): 384–392. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.electstud.2012.02.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bormann, N., and M. Golder. 2013. “Democratic Electoral Systems Around the World, 1946–2011.” Electoral Studies 32 (2): 360–369. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.electstud.2013.01.005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bowler, S., D. M. Farrell, and R. S. Katz. 1999. Party Discipline and Parliamentary Government. Columbus: Ohio State University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Carey, J. M. 2007. “Competing Principals, Political Institutions, and Party Unity in Legislative Voting.” American Journal of Political Science 51 (1): 92–107. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5907.2007.00239.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carey, J. M., and A. Reynolds. 2007. “Parties and Accountable Government in New Democracies.” Party Politics 13 (2): 255–274. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354068807073866
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carey, J. M., and M. S. Shugart. 1995. “Incentives to Cultivate a Personal Vote: A Rank Ordering of Electoral Formulas.” Electoral Studies 14 (4): 417–439. https://doi.org/10.1016/0261-3794(94)00035-2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carroll, R., G. W. Cox, and M. Pachón. 2006. “How Parties Create Electoral Democracy, Chapter 2.” Legislative Studies Quarterly 31 (2): 153–174. https://doi.org/10.3162/036298006X201760
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Castles, R., and R. Wildenmann. 1986. The Future of Party Government. New York: de Gruyter.
   Google Scholar
• Chaisty, P. 2005. “Party Cohesion and Policy-Making in Russia.” Party Politics 11 (3): 299–318. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354068805051783
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clark, T., Z. Martinaitis, and R. Dilba. 2008. “Electoral Mandate and Party Cohesion: Does It Matter in Lithuania?” Journal of Communist Studies and Transition Politics 24 (3): 317–337. https://doi.org/10.1080/13523270802267864
   Google Scholar
• Cowley, P., and P. Norton. 1999. “Rebels and Rebellions: Conservative MPs in the 1992 Parliament.” British Journal of Politics and International Relations 1 (1): 84–105. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-856X.00005
   Google Scholar
• Cox, G. W. 2006. “The Organization of Democratic Legislatures.” In The Oxford Handbook of Political Economy, edited by B. R. Weingast and D. A. Wittman, 141–161. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Crisp, B. F. 2007. “Incentives in Mixed Member Electoral Systems: General Election Laws, Candidate Selection Procedures, and Cameral Rules.” Comparative Political Studies 40 (12): 703–716. https://doi.org/10.1177/0010414007301703
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Depauw, S., and S. Martin. 2009. “Legislative Party Discipline and Cohesion in Comparative Perspective.” In Intra-Party Politics and Coalition Governments, edited by D. Giannetti and K. Benoit, 103–120. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Ferejohn, J. A. 1974. Pork Barrel Politics: Rivers and Harbors Legislation, 1947–1968. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ferrara, F., E. Herron, and M. Nishikawa. 2005. Mixed Electoral Systems: Contamination and its Consequences. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Finch, W. H., J. E. Bolin, and K. Kelley. 2014. Multilevel Modeling Using R. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
   Google Scholar
• Froman, L. A. 1967. The Congressional Process. Boston, MA: Little, Brown.
   Google Scholar
• Hall, R. L. 1996. Participation in Congress. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Haughton, T., and K. Deegan-Krause. 2015. “Hurricane Season: Systems of Instability in Central and East European Party Politics.” East European Politics and Societies and Cultures 29 (1): 61–80. https://doi.org/10.1177/0888325414566072
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hazan, R. Y. 2000. “Yes, Institutions Matter: The Impact of Institutional Reform on Parliamentary Members and Leaders in Israel.” In The Uneasy Relationships Between Parliamentary Members and Leaders, edited by L. D. Lawrence and R. Y. Hazan, 303–326. London: Frank Cass.
   Google Scholar
• Hazan, R. Y., and G. Rahat. 2006. “The Influence of Candidate Selection Methods on Legislatures and Legislators: Theoretical Propositions, Methodological Suggestions and Empirical Evidence.” Journal of Legislative Studies 12 (3-4): 366–385. https://doi.org/10.1080/13572330600875647
   Google Scholar
• Herron, E. 2002. “Electoral Influences on Legislative Behavior in Mixed-Member Systems: Evidence from Ukraine’s Verkhovna Rada.” Legislative Studies Quarterly 27 (3): 361–382. https://doi.org/10.2307/3598568
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Herron, E., and F. Ferrara. 2005. “Going It Alone? Strategic Entry Under Mixed Electoral Rules.” American Journal of Political Science 49 (1): 16–31. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0092-5853.2005.00107.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Herron, E., and M. Nishikawa. 2001. “Contamination Effects and the Number of Parties in Mixed–Superposition Electoral Systems.” Electoral Studies 20 (1): 63–86. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0261-3794(00)00002-0
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hopkin, J., and C. Paolucci. 1999. “The Business Firm Model of Party Organization: Cases from Spain and Italy.” European Journal of Political Research 35 (3): 307–339.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hox, J. 2010. Multilevel Analysis: Techniques and Applications. 2nd ed. New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Huber, J., and C. Shipan. 2002. Deliberate Discretion: The Institutional Foundations of Bureaucratic Autonomy. New York: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hug, S. 2009. “Selection Effects in Roll Call Votes.” British Journal of Political Science 40 (1): 225–235. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0007123409990160
   Google Scholar
• Ishiyama, J. 2000. “Candidate Recruitment, Party Organization and the Communist Successor Parties: The Cases of the MSZP, the KPRF and the LDDP.” Europe-Asia Studies 52 (5): 875–896. https://doi.org/10.1080/713663097
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jastramskis, M., V. Kuokštis, and M. Baltrukevičius. 2021. “Retrospective Voting in Central and Eastern Europe: Hyper-Accountability, Corruption or Socio-Economic Inequality?” Party Politics 27 (4): 667–679. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354068819880320
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jun, Hae-Won, and S. Hix. 2010. “Electoral Systems, Political Career Paths and Legislative Behavior: Evidence from South Korea’s Mixed-Member System.” Japanese Journal of Political Science 11 (2): 153–171.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kam, C. 2009. Party Discipline and Parliamentary Government. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Katz, R. S. 1987. Party Governments: European and American Experiences. New York: de Gruyter.
   Google Scholar
• Kerevel, Y. 2010. “The Legislative Consequences of Mexico’s Mixed–Member Electoral System, 2000–2009.” Electoral Studies 29 (4): 484–496. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.electstud.2010.07.004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Klein, E. 2016. “Electoral Rules and Party Switching: How Legislators Prioritize Their Goals.” Legislative Studies Quarterly 41 (3): 715–738. https://doi.org/10.1111/lsq.12128
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Klein, E. 2018. “The Personal Vote and Legislative Party Switching.” Party Politics 24 (5): 501–510. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354068816678886
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Klein, E. 2021. “Explaining Legislative Party Switching in Advanced and New Democracies.” Party Politics 27 (2): 329–340. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354068819852262
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kunicova, J., and T. F. Remington. 2008. “Mandates, Parties and Dissent: Effect of Electoral Rules on Parliamentary Party Cohesion in the Russian State Duma, 1994–2003.” Party Politics 14 (5): 555–574. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354068808093390
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lijphart, A. 1999. Patterns of Democracy: Government Forms and Performance in Thirty-Six Countries. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Louwerse, T., and S. Otjes. 2016. “Personalised Parliamentary Behaviour Without Electoral Incentives: The Case of the Netherlands.” West European Politics 39 (4): 778–799. https://doi.org/10.1080/01402382.2015.1111041
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mainwaring, S. 1999. Rethinking Party Systems in the Third Wave of Democratization. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Mainwaring, S., C. Gervasoni, and A. Espana-Najera. 2017. “Extra- and Within-System Electoral Volatility.” Party Politics 23 (6): 623–635. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354068815625229
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martin, S. 2012. “Why Electoral Systems Don’t Always Matter: The Impact of ‘Mega-Seats’ on Legislative Behaviour in Ireland.” Party Politics 20 (3): 467–479. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354068811436061
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martin, S. 2018. “Electoral Systems and Legislative Organization.” In The Oxford Handbook of Electoral Systems, edited by E. S. Herron, R. J. Pekkanen, and M. S. Shugart, 303–319. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Mershon, C., and O. Shvetsova. 2008. “Parliamentary Cycles and Party Switching in Legislatures.” Comparative Political Studies 41 (1): 99–127. https://doi.org/10.1177/0010414007303651
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mershon, C., and O. Shvetsova. 2013. Party System Change in Legislatures Worldwide. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Meserve, S., J. Robbins, and F. Thames. 2017. “Multiple Principals and Legislative Cohesion.” Legislative Studies Quarterly 42 (4): 515–548. https://doi.org/10.1111/lsq.12165
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moser, R. G., and E. Scheiner. 2004. “Mixed Electoral Systems and Electoral System Effects: Controlled Comparison and Cross-National Analysis.” Electoral Studies 23 (4): 575–599. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0261-3794(03)00056-8
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Owens, J. E. 2003. “Explaining Party Cohesion and Discipline in Democratic Legislatures: Purposiveness and Contests.” Journal of Legislative Studies 9 (4): 12–40. https://doi.org/10.1080/1357233042000306236
   Google Scholar
• Pop-Eleches, G. 2010. “Throwing Out the Bums: Protest Voting and Unorthodox Parties After Communism.” World Politics 62 (2): 221–260. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0043887110000043
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Preece, R. J. 2014. “How the Party Can Win in Personal Vote Systems: The ‘Selectoral Connection’ and Legislative Voting in Lithuania.” Legislative Studies Quarterly 39 (2): 147–167. https://doi.org/10.1111/lsq.12040
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• R Core Team. 2022. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. https://www.R-project.org/.
   Google Scholar
• Rahat, G. 2007. “Determinants of Party Cohesion: Evidence from the Case of the Israeli Parliament.” Parliamentary Affairs 60 (2): 279–296. https://doi.org/10.1093/pa/gsm003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ramonaitė, A. 2020. “Mapping the Political Space in Lithuania: The Discrepancy Between Party Elites and Party Supporters.” Journal of Baltic Studies 51 (4): 477–496. https://doi.org/10.1080/01629778.2020.1792521
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Raunio, T., and T. Sedelius. 2019. “Shifting Power-Centres of Semi-Presidentialism: Exploring Executive Coordination in Lithuania.” Government and Opposition 54 (4): 637–660. https://doi.org/10.1017/gov.2017.31
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rich, T. S. 2014. “Party Voting Cohesion in Mixed Member Legislative Systems: Evidence from Korea and Taiwan.” Legislative Studies Quarterly 39 (1): 113–135. https://doi.org/10.1111/lsq.12035
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roberts, A. 2008. “Hyperaccountability: Economic Voting in Central and Eastern Europe.” Electoral Studies 27 (3): 533–546. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.electstud.2008.01.008
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Saiegh, S. M. 2014. “LawMaking.” In The Oxford Handbook of Legislative Studies, edited by S. Martin, T. Saalfeld, and K. W. Strøm, 481–513. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Shepsle, K. A. 1978. The Giant Jigsaw Puzzle: Democratic Committee Assignments in the Modern House. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Shomer, Y. 2017. “The Conditional Effect of Electoral Systems and Intraparty Candidate Selection Processes on Parties’ Behavior.” Legislative Studies Quarterly 42 (1): 93–96. https://doi.org/10.1111/lsq.12141
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sieberer, U. 2010. “Behavioral Consequences of Mixed Electoral Systems: Deviating Voting Behavior of District and List MPs in the German Bundestag.” Electoral Studies 29 (3): 484–496. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.electstud.2010.04.012
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sikk, A. 2012. “Newness as a Winning Formula for New Political Parties.” Party Politics 18 (4): 465–486. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354068810389631
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smith, D. M., and S. Martin. 2017. “Political Dynasties and the Selection of Cabinet Ministers.” Legislative Studies Quarterly 42 (1): 131–165. https://doi.org/10.1111/lsq.12146
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Snyder, J. M., and T. Groseclose. 2000. “Estimating Party Influence in Congressional Roll-Call Voting.” American Journal of Political Science 44 (2): 193–211. https://doi.org/10.2307/2669305
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Strøm, K. 1990. Minority Government and Majority Rule. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Tavits, M. 2009. “The Making of Mavericks: Local Loyalties and Party Defection.” Comparative Political Studies 42 (6): 793–815. https://doi.org/10.1177/0010414008329900
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thames, F. C. 2001. “Legislative Voting Behavior in the Russian Duma: Understanding the Effect of Mandate.” Europe-Asia Studies 53 (6): 869–894. https://doi.org/10.1080/09668130120078531
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thames, F. C. 2005. “A House Divided: Party Strength and the Mandate Divide in Hungary, Russia, and Ukraine.” Comparative Political Studies 38 (3): 282–303. https://doi.org/10.1177/0010414004272526
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thames, Frank C. 2007. “Discipline and Party Institutionalization in Post-Soviet Legislatures.” Party Politics 13 (4): 456–477. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354068807077956
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thomas, S. 1994. How Women Legislate. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Tzelgov, E. 2011. “Communist Successor Parties and Government Survival in Central Eastern Europe.” European Journal of Political Research 50 (4): 530–558. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-6765.2010.01937.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Volden, C., and E. Bergman. 2006. “How Strong Should Our Party Be? Party Member Preferences over Party Cohesion.” Legislative Studies Quarterly 31 (1): 71–104. https://doi.org/10.3162/036298006X201733
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weeks, L. 2009. “Political Parties and the Party System.” In Politics in the Republic of Ireland, edited by J. Coakley and M. Gallagher, 137–167. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar