CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 80Political Theory and DemocracyPolitical Conflict and GovernanceElectoral Systems and Political Participation

Towards a unified approach to research on democratic backsliding

Jee, Haemin, Lueders, Hans, Myrick, Rachel·2022·Democratization
DOI 10.1080/13510347.2021.2010709
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

A growing literature examines democratic backsliding, but there is little consensus on when, where, and why it occurs. Reviewing more than 100 recent articles and working papers, this research note argues that inattention to the measurement of backsliding and the underlying concept of democracy drives this disagreement. We propose three remedies. First, we outline several questions that help researchers navigate common measurement challenges. Second, we argue that conceptual confusion around backsliding is driven in large part by inconsistent definitions of democracy. We show how outlining a comprehensive concept of democracy enables researchers to better account for the diversity of instances of democratic backsliding. Our third contribution is drawing attention to a previously overlooked form of backsliding: when governments lose the effective power to govern or voters and elites increasingly disagree about truths and facts. The research note urges scholars to pay closer attention to the conceptualization and measurement of backsliding prior to empirical analysis.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/13510347.2021.2010709

Cites

47 of 47 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • Different epistemological understandings between parties have undermined coordination.

    “What is perhaps more concerning (and of direct relevance to the Trump administration) is how different epistemological understandings between parties have undermined coordination (Jee et al., 2022).”

    From How to study democratic backsliding (2024) · cites this paper as Jee et al., 2022

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 48 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Jee, H., Lueders, H., & Myrick, R.
Affiliations
  • Stanford University (US)
  • Duke University (US)
Corresponding author
Lueders, Hans
ORCID
Venue
Democratization
Publisher
Informa UK Limited
Published
2021-12-09
Volume
29
Issue
4
Pages
754-767
ISSN
  • 1351-0347 (ISSN-L)
  • 1743-890X
DOI
10.1080/13510347.2021.2010709
OpenAlex
W4200257118
Cited by
80
References
48
Citations by year
2026: 18 · 2025: 33 · 2024: 15 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 5
FWCI
24.07
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Democratization (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Political Theory and Democracy
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Political Conflict and Governance
  • Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Electoral Systems and Political Participation
Keywords
democratic backsliding, concept of democracy, definition of democracy, conceptual confusion, government effectiveness

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