CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 65Political Theory and DemocracyElectoral Systems and Political ParticipationPolitical Conflict and Governance

Is the American Public Really Turning Away from Democracy? Backsliding and the Conceptual Challenges of Understanding Public Attitudes

Open access
Ahmed, Amel·2023·Perspectives on Politics
DOI 10.1017/s1537592722001062
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Recent scholarship has warned that the American public is turning away from democracy, with many focusing on the role of polarization in driving these trends. While these studies devote a great deal of attention to conceptualizing and measuring polarization, however, there is much less attention to the concept of democracy itself. As a result, they encounter several problems: First, lack of attention to the categorical and contextual differences between various democratic transgressions can lead to misleading findings. Second, slippage between macro and micro level analysis of backsliding can make it difficult to draw solid inferences about attitudes. Finally, lack of attention to contestation within the concept of democracy obscures a different kind of regime contention reflected in public attitudes. These problems confound efforts to understand whether the American public is truly turning away from democracy and point to the need for greater collaboration among scholars from different intellectual traditions and methodological orientations.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1017/s1537592722001062

Cites

10 of 10 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Changed opportunity costs contributed to conspiratorial tropes about electoral functioning.

    “Another contributor to recent erosive tendencies in the United States comes from changed opportunity costs that contributed to conspiratorial tropes about electoral functioningthat is, ill-founded beliefs that violate democratic ideals about the basic legal premises of democracy (Ahmed, 2023).”

    From How to study democratic backsliding (2024) · cites this paper as Ahmed, 2023

    In “Categorical Differentiation: Types of Transgressions” (page unavailable), Ahmed includes conspiratorial thinking among violations of democratic ideals. “Democracy and Contention” discusses election-fraud claims and says the pandemic intensified polarization over mail-in voting. Neither passage says changed opportunity costs caused conspiratorial beliefs; the paper also distinguishes violations of ideals from violations of law, rather than treating them as violations of democracy’s basic legal premises. (LLM, conf=0.83)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 68

  1. Agh, Attila. 2015. "De-Europeanization and De- Democratization Trends in EC." Journal of Comparative Politics 8(2): 5-26.
  2. Ahmed, Amel. 2013. Democracy and the Politics of Electoral System Choice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  3. Arbatli, Ekim, and Dina Rosenberg. 2021. "United We Stand, Divided We Rule." Democratization 28(2): 285-307.
  4. Azari, Julia, and Jennifer Smith. 2012. "Unwritten Rules: Informal Institutions in Established Democracies." Perspectives on Politics 10(1): 37-55.
  5. Bartels, Larry 2020. "Ethnic Antagonism Erodes Republicans' Commitment to Democracy." Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 117(37): 22752-59.
  6. Bateman, David 2018. Disenfranchising Democracy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  7. Bermeo, Nancy. 2016. "On Democratic Backsliding." Journal of Democracy 27(1): 5-19.
  8. Bolsen, Toby, James Druckman, and Fay Cook. 2014. "The Influence of Partisan Motivated Reasoning on Public Opinion." Political Behavior 36(2): 235-62.
  9. Booth, John, and Mitchell Seligson. 2009. The Legitimacy Puzzle in Latin America Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  10. Bratton, Michael. 2010. "The Meanings of Democracy." Journal of Democracy 21(4): 106-13.
  11. Carey, John, Gretchen Helmke, Brendan Nyhan, Mitchell Sanders, and Susan Stokes. 2019. "Searching for Bright Lines in the Trump Presidency." Perspectives on Politics 17(3): 699-718.
  12. --. 2020. "Who Will Defend Democracy?" Journal of Elections, Public Opinion and Parties 32(1): 230-45.
  13. Claassen, Christopher. 2019. "Does Public Support Help Democracy Survive?" American Journal of Political Science 64(1): 118-134.
  14. Cramer Walsh, Katherine. 2009. "Scholars as Citizens" In Political Ethnography, ed. Edward Schatz,.Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  15. Easton, David. 1965. A Systems Analysis of Political Life. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  16. Eckstein, Harry. 1961. A Theory of Stable Democracy. Center of International Studies. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
  17. Erdmann, Gero, and Marianne Kneuer. 2013. Regression of Democracy? London: Springer Science & Business Media.
  18. Fishkin, Joseph, and David Pozen. 2018. "Asymmetric Constitutional Hardball." Columbia Law Review 118(3): 915-82.
  19. Foa, Roberto Stefan, and Yascha Mounk. 2016. "The Danger of Deconsolidation" Journal of Democracy 27(3): 5-17.
  20. Gerschewski, Johannes. 2021. "Erosion or Decay?" Democratization 28(1): 43-62.
  21. Gilmore, Glenda. 2008. Defying Dixie. New York: W.W. Norton & Company. Ginsburg, Tom, and Aziz Huq. 2019. How to Save a Constitutional Democracy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  22. Graham, Matthew, and Milan Svolik. 2020. "Democracy in America?" American Political Science Review 114(2): 392-409.
  23. Haggard, Stephan, and Robert Kaufman. 2016. Dictators and Democrats. Princeton, NJ: University Press.
  24. Hattam, Victoria, and Joseph Lowndes. 2008. "The Ground Beneath Our Feet." In Formative Acts, ed. Stephen Skowronek and Matthew Glassman. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
  25. Helmke, Gretchen, and Steven Levitsky. 2004. "Informal Institutions and Comparative Politics." Perspectives on Politics 2(4): 725-40.
  26. Holmes, Stephen. 1995. Passions and Constraint. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  27. Iyengar, Shanto, and Sean Westwood. 2015. "Fear and Loathing across Party Lines" American Journal of Political Science 59(3): 690-707.
  28. Kiewiet de Jonge, Chad P. 2016. "Should Researchers Abandon Questions about 'Democracy'?" Public Opinion Quarterly 80(3): 694-716.
  29. King, Desmond, and Rogers Smith. 2011. Still a House Divided. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
  30. --. 2014. "'Without Regard to Race'" Journal of Politics 76(4): 958-71.
  31. Koger, Gregory. 2010. Filibustering. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  32. Krochmal, Max. 2016. Blue Texas. Chapel Hill, NC:UNC Press Books.
  33. Lieberman, Robert. 2002. "Ideas, Institutions, and Political Order." American Political Science Review 96(4): 697-712.
  34. Lührmann, Anna, and Staffan Lindberg. 2019. "A Third Wave of Autocratization Is Here" Democratization 26(7): 1095-113.
  35. Mason, Lilliana. 2018. Uncivil Agreement. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  36. Mattes, Robert, and Michael Bratton. 2007. "Learning about Democracy in Africa" American Journal of Political Science 51(1): 192-217.
  37. McCoy, Jennifer, Gabor Simonovits, and Levente Littvay. 2020. "Democratic Hypocrisy: Polarized Citizens Support Democracy-Eroding Behavior When Their Own Party Is in Power." APSA Preprint, https:// preprints.apsanet.org/engage/apsa/article- details/5f470ab12308c500122295a7.
  38. Mickey, Robert. 2015. Paths Out of Dixie. Princeton NJ: Princeton University Press.
  39. Noel, Hans. 2012. "The Coalition Merchants." The Journal of Politics 74(1): 156-73.
  40. Norris, Pippa. 2011. Democratic Deficit. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  41. Orren, Karen, and Stephen Skowronek. 2004. The Search for American Political Development. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  42. Panagopoulos, Costas. 2016. "All about That Base." Party Politics 22(2): 179-90.
  43. Pelke, Lars, and Aurel Croissant. 2021. "Conceptualizing and Measuring Autocratization Episodes." Swiss Political Science Review 27(2): 1-15.
  44. Przeworski, Adam, and José María Maravall. 2003. Democracy and the Rule of Law. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  45. Rana, Aziz. 2011. The Two Faces of American Freedom. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  46. Rhodes, Jesse. 2017. Ballot Blocked. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press.
  47. Rose, Richard, William Mishler, and Christian Haerpfer. 1998. Democracy and Its Alternatives. London: Polity Press.
  48. Schaffer, Frederic. 2000. Democracy in Translation. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
  49. Scheppele, Kim. 2018. "Autocratic Legalism." University of Chicago Law Review 85(2): 545-84.
  50. Schickler, Eric. 2016. Racial Realignment. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
  51. Skaaning, Svend-Erik. 2020. "Waves of Autocratization and Democratization" Democratization 27(8): 1533-42.
  52. Skowronek, Stephen. 2006. "The Reassociation of Ideas and Purposes." American Political Science Review 100(3): 385-401.
  53. Slater, Dan. 2013. "Democratic Careening." World Politics 65(4): 729-63.
  54. Smith, Rogers. 2003. Stories of Peoplehood. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  55. --. 2015. Political Peoplehood. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  56. Stolle, Dietlind, Elisabeth Gidengil, and Olivier Bergeron- Boutin. 2019. "Partisanship and Support for Democratic Backsliding Observational and Experimental Evidence from the United States and Canada." Presented at the Seventh Annual Toronto Political Behavior Workshop at the Munk School of Global Affairs & Public Policy, University of Toronto.
  57. Svolik, Milan. 2019. "Polarization vs. Democracy." Journal of Democracy 30(3): 23-32.
  58. Teele, Dawn Langan. 2018. Forging the Franchise. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
  59. Tillman, Seth. 2016. "Ex Parte Merryman." Military Law Review 224:481-540.
  60. Tomini, Luca, and Claudius Wagemann. 2018. "Varieties of Contemporary Democratic Breakdown and Regression." European Journal of Political Research 57(3): 687-716.
  61. Touchton, Michael, Casey Klofstad, and Joseph Uscinski. 2020. "Does Partisanship Promote Anti-Democratic Impulses?" Journal of Elections, Public Opinion and Parties 0(0): 1-13.
  62. Valelly, Richard. 2009. The Two Reconstructions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  63. Waldner, David, and Ellen Lust. 2018. "Unwelcome Change." Annual Review of Political Science 21(1): 93-113.
  64. Wawro, Gregory, and Eric Schickler. 2007. Filibuster. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
  65. Welzel, Christian. 2007. "Are Levels of Democracy Affected by Mass Attitudes?" International Political Science Review 28(4): 397-424.
  66. Wert, Justin. 2011. Habeas Corpus in America. Lawrence: University Press of Kansas.
  67. Wike, Richard, and Janell Fetterolf. 2018. "Liberal Democracy's Crisis of Confidence." Journal of Democracy 29(4): 136-50.
  68. Zaller, John, and Stanley Feldman. 1992. "A Simple Theory of the Survey Response." American Journal of Political Science 36(3): 579-616.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Ahmed, A.
Corresponding author
Ahmed, Amel
ORCID
Ahmed, Amel
Venue
Perspectives on Politics
Publisher
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Published
2022-07-18
Volume
21
Issue
3
Pages
967-978
ISSN
  • 1537-5927 (ISSN-L)
  • 1541-0986
DOI
10.1017/s1537592722001062
OpenAlex
W4285728922
Cited by
65
References
10
Citations by year
2026: 12 · 2025: 28 · 2024: 17 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 2
FWCI
43.26
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
Perspectives on Politics (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Political Theory and Democracy
  • Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Electoral Systems and Political Participation
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Political Conflict and Governance
Keywords
democratic backsliding, public attitudes toward democracy, political polarization, conceptualization of democracy, American public opinion

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review