The Brexit vote: a divided nation, a divided continent
Open accessAbstract
The outcome of the British referendum on European Union (EU) membership sent shockwaves through Europe. While Britain is an outlier when it comes to the strength of Euroscepticism, the anti-immigration and anti-establishment sentiments that produced the referendum outcome are gaining strength across Europe. Analysing campaign and survey data, this article shows that the divide between winners and losers of globalization was a key driver of the vote. Favouring British EU exit, or ‘Brexit’, was particularly common among less-educated, poorer and older voters, and those who expressed concerns about immigration and multi-culturalism. While there is no evidence of a short-term contagion effect with similar membership referendums in other countries, the Brexit vote nonetheless poses a serious challenge to the political establishment across Europe.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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?
The build-up to the Brexit plebiscite was a consequence of the internal machinations of the parliamentary Conservative Party that forced the hand of their leader, David Cameron.
“Although the vote itself was up to citizens, the build-up to the plebiscite was a matter for elites; specifically, it was a consequence of the internal machinations of the parliamentary Conservative Party that forced the hand of their leader, Prime Minster David Cameron (Hobolt 2016).”
From Embedding Regression: Models for Context-Specific Description and Inference (2023) · cites this paper as Hobolt 2016
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
No references could be resolved yet.
Research works printed but not linked: 31
- Azmanova, A. (2011) 'After the left-right (dis)continuum: globalization and the remaking of Europe's ideological geography', International Political Sociology 5(4): 384-407.
- Carey, S. (2002) 'Undivided loyalties: Is national identity an obstacle to European integration?' European Union Politics 3(4): 387-413.
- De Vreese, C.H. and Boomgaarden, H.G. (2005) 'Projecting EU Referendums: Fear of Immigration and Support for European Integration', European Union Politics, 6(1): 59-82
- De Vries, C.E. and Edwards, E. (2009) 'Taking Europe to Its Extremes: Extremist Parties and Public Euroskepticism', Party Politics 15(1): 5-28.
- Franklin, M. (2002) 'Learning from the Danish case: a comment on Palle Svensson's critique of the Franklin thesis', European Journal of Political Research 41: 751-7.
- Franklin, M., Marsh, M. and McLaren, L. (1994) 'Uncorking the bottle: popular opposition to European unification in the wake of Maastricht', Journal of Common Market Studies 32(4): 455- 72
- Franklin, M., Van der Eijk, C. and Marsh, M. (1995) 'Referendum outcomes and trust in government: Public support for Europe in the wake of Maastricht', West European Politics 18(3): 101-117.
- Gabel, MJ. (1998). Interest and Integration: Market Liberalization, Public Opinion and European Union. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
- Gabel, MJ, and Palmer, HD (1995) 'Understanding variation in public support for European integration'. European Journal of Political Research 27: 3-19.
- Garry, J., Marsh, M. and Sinnott, R. (2005) 'Second order versus issue voting effects in EU referendums: evidence from the Irish Nice Treaty referendums', European Union Politics 6(2): 201-21.
- Hakhverdian, A., E. Van Elsas, W. Van Der Brug, and T. Kuhn (2013) 'Euroscepticism and Education: A Longitudinal Study of 12 EU Member States.' European Union Politics, 14(4): 522-541.
- Hobolt, S.B. (2007) 'Taking Cues on Europe? Voter Competence and Party Endorsements in Referendums on European Integration'. European Journal of Political Research, 46(2): 151-182.
- Hobolt, S.B. (2009) Europe in question: Referendums on European integration. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
- Hobolt, S.B. and De Vries, C.E. (2016a) 'Public support for European integration', Annual Review of Political Science, 19: 413-432.
- Hobolt, S.B. and De Vries, C.E. (2016b) 'Turning against the union? The impact of the crisis on the Eurosceptic vote in the 2014 European Parliament elections'. Electoral Studies. doi:10.1016/j.electstud.2016.05.006. · DOI
- Hobolt, S.B. and De Vries, C.E. (2015) 'Issue entrepreneurship and multiparty competition', Comparative Political Studies, 48 (9): 1159-1185.
- Hobolt, S.B., Van der Brug, W., De Vreese, C.H., Boomgaarden, H.G., Hinrichsen, M.C. (2011) 'Religious intolerance and Euroscepticism', European Union Politics, 12 (3): 359-379.
- Hooghe, L and Marks, G. (2009) 'Postfunctionalism A Postfunctionalist Theory of European Integration: From Permissive Consensus to Constraining Dissensus', British Journal of Political Science, 39(1): 1-23.
- Jensen, M.D. and Snaith, H. (2016) 'When politics prevails: the political economy of a Brexit', Journal of European Public Policy, DOI: 10.1080/13501763.2016.1174531 · DOI
- Kriesi, H, Grande, E, Dolezal, M, Helbling, M, Hoglinger, D, Hutter, S and Wuest, B (2012). Political Conflict in Western Europe, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- Lupia, A. (1992) 'Busy voters, agenda control, and the power of information', American Political Science Review 86: 390-403.
- McLaren, L. (2002) 'Public Support for the European Union: Cost/Benefit Analysis or Perceived Cultural Threat?' Journal of Politics, 64(2): 551-566.
- McLaren, L. (2006) Identity, Interests and Attitudes to European Integration. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
- Mudde, C. (2007) Populist Radical Right Parties in Europe. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- Prosser, Chris (2016) 'Calling European Union treaty referendums: Electoral and institutional politics'. Political Studies, 64(1): 182-199.
- Reif, K. and Schmitt, H. (1980) 'Nine second-order national elections: a conceptual framework for the analysis of European election results', European Journal of Political Research 8(1): 3-44.
- Siune, K., Svensson, P. and Tonsgaard, O. (1994) 'The EU: the Danes said "no" in 1992, but "yes" in 1993: how and why?', Electoral Studies 13(2): 107-16.
- Teney, C., Lacewell, O.P. and De Wilde, P. (2014) Winners and losers of globalization in Europe: attitudes and ideologies. European Political Science Review, 6(4): 575-595.
- Treib, O (2014) 'The Voter Says No, but Nobody Listens: Causes and Consequences of the Eurosceptic Vote in the 2014 European Elections', Journal of European Public Policy 21(10), 2014, 1541-1554
- Tucker, JA., Pacek, AC, Berinsky, AJ.(2002). 'Transitional Winners and Losers: Attitudes toward EU membership in Post-Communist Countries', American Journal of Political Science, 46(3): 557-571
- Van Elsas, E, van der Brug, W. and Hakhverdian, A. (2016) 'United against a common foe? The nature and origins of euroscepticism among left-wing and right-wing voters'. West European Politics. DOI:10.1080/01402382.2016.1175244 · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Newman, B., Merolla, J. L., Shah, S., Lemi, D. C., Collingwood, L., & Ramakrishnan, S. K. (2021) · British Journal of Political Science · doi:10.1017/s0007123419000590 · Cited by 267 · see citing works
Embedding Regression: Models for Context-Specific Description and Inference
RODRIGUEZ, P. L., SPIRLING, A., & STEWART, B. M. (2023) · American Political Science Review · doi:10.1017/s0003055422001228 · Cited by 70 · see citing works
“Although the vote itself was up to citizens, the build-up to the plebiscite was a matter for elites; specifically, it was a consequence of the internal machinations of the parliamentary Conservative Party that forced the hand of their leader, Prime Minster David Cameron (Hobolt 2016).”
BackgroundChild language brokering as a family care practice: reframing the ‘parentified child’ debate
Crafter, S., & Iqbal, H. (2022) · Children & Society · doi:10.1111/chso.12485 · Cited by 38 · see citing works
North, S., Piwek, L., & Joinson, A. (2021) · Policy & Internet · doi:10.1002/poi3.247 · Cited by 16 · see citing works
- Authors
- Hobolt, S. B.
- Affiliations
- London School of Economics and Political Science (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Hobolt, Sara B.
- ORCID
- Hobolt, Sara B.
- Venue
- Journal of European Public Policy
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2016-09-07
- Volume
- 23
- Issue
- 9
- Pages
- 1259-1277
- ISSN
- 1350-1763 (ISSN-L)
- 1466-4429
- OpenAlex
- W2507821054
- Cited by
- 1,156
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 70 · 2025: 80 · 2024: 102 · 2023: 94 · 2022: 108 · 2021: 174 · 2020: 164 · 2019: 196 · 2018: 111 · 2017: 55 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 1
- FWCI
- 612.52
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- orcid.org
- Locations
- Journal of European Public Policy (publishedVersion)
- London School of Economics and Political Science Research Online (London School of Economics and Political Science) (submittedVersion)
- London School of Economics and Political Science Theses Online (London School of Economics and Political Science) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- British Academy (SG153370)
- Leverhulme Trust (SG153370)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › European Union Policy and Governance
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Populism, Right-Wing Movements
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Electoral Systems and Political Participation
- Keywords
- Brexit, EU membership referendum, Euroscepticism, anti-immigrant sentiment, anti-establishment sentiment, voter characteristics, immigration concerns, multiculturalism, political establishment
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
