The DOI matches its Crossref record; 19 of the 19 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Party unity in parliamentary democracies: A comparative analysis
Open accessAbstract
The level and causes of party unity are under-researched topics in parliamentary democracies, particularly in comparative perspective. This article presents a non-formal model explaining party unity in legislative voting as the result of individual legislators' decisions reacting to the incentives and constraints created by their respective institutional environments. Hypotheses derived from the model are tested against empirical data on party unity in 11 western parliamentary democracies since 1945. On the system level, central party control over nominations and intra-parliamentary resources as well as the strength of parliamentary committees with regard to policy decisions are shown to affect party unity as expected by the model. On the level of individual parties, governing parties are less unified than opposition parties and larger parties show higher unity than smaller ones. Both results shed doubt on frequent claims in the literature.
Overview
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
Verification
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Congress, The Electoral Connection
Ross, M. J., & Mayhew, D. R. (1975) · The Western Political Quarterly · doi:10.2307/447379 · Cited by 4,094
Veto Players. How Political Institutions Work
Giné, V. L., & Tsebelis, G. (2003) · Reis · doi:10.2307/40184562 · Cited by 3,359
Legislative leviathan: party government in the House
(1993) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.31-0579 · Cited by 2,313
The Logic of Comparative Social Inquiry.
Labovitz, S., Przeworski, A., Teune, H., Holt, R. T., & Turner, J. E. (1971) · American Sociological Review · doi:10.2307/2094059 · Cited by 2,251
The Theory of Political Coalitions.
Hotz, A. J., & Riker, W. H. (1963) · Midwest Journal of Political Science · doi:10.2307/2109034 · Cited by 1,528
Principles of Group Solidarity
Stolzman, J., & Hechter, M. (1989) · Canadian Journal of Sociology / Cahiers canadiens de sociologie · doi:10.2307/3341302 · Cited by 759
Multiparty government: the politics of coalition in Europe
(1991) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.28-6457 · Cited by 627
Flanigan, W. H. (1988) · Political Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2150771 · Cited by 594
Political parties in parliamentary democracies: Making delegation and accountability work
Müller, W. C. (2000) · European Journal of Political Research · doi:10.1023/a:1007073021074 · Cited by 494
Cohesion in Legislatures and the Vote of Confidence Procedure
Diermeier, D., & Feddersen, T. J. (1998) · American Political Science Review · doi:10.2307/2585484 · Cited by 469
Cited by
Comparing Cosponsorship and Roll‐Call Ideal Points
ALEMÁN, E., CALVO, E., JONES, M. P., & KAPLAN, N. (2009) · Legislative Studies Quarterly · doi:10.3162/036298009787500358 · Cited by 125
Ideology, Grandstanding, and Strategic Party Disloyalty in the British Parliament
SLAPIN, J. B., KIRKLAND, J. H., LAZZARO, J. A., LESLIE, P. A., & O’GRADY, T. (2018) · American Political Science Review · doi:10.1017/s0003055417000375 · Cited by 84
Metadata
- Authors
- Sieberer, U.
- Venue
- The Journal of Legislative Studies
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2006-06
- Volume
- 12
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 150-178
- ISSN
- 1357-2334 (ISSN-L)
- 1743-9337
- OpenAlex
- W2096916277
- Cited by
- 373
- References
- 19
- FWCI
- 32.71
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Party unity in parliamentary democracies: A comparative analysis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1080/13572330600739413
- The paper
- Sieberer, U. (2006). Party unity in parliamentary democracies: A comparative analysis. The Journal of Legislative Studies. https://doi.org/10.1080/13572330600739413
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
