“He’s not my prime minister!”: negative party identification and satisfaction with democracy
Abstract
Across Europe and the United States, negative party identification – an abiding aversion to a particular opposing political party is on the rise. At the same time, satisfaction with democracy is down worldwide. In this article, we explore the potential connection between these two phenomena. We develop a theory that posits a relationship between negative party identification and satisfaction with democracy where institutional structures and outcomes can mitigate the deleterious effects of negative party identification. We test our theory by drawing on data from 25 parliamentary and semi-presidential countries in the third wave of the Comparative Study of Electoral Systems (CSES) from 2006–2011 to assess the cross-national effect of negative party identification on levels of satisfaction with the democratic process in one’s own country. We find that satisfaction with democracy declines among voters in multiparty systems when an “out-group” party holds the prime ministership. At the same time, larger vote margins and the nature of the governing coalition can mitigate the effects of negative party identification. Our findings have important implications for how institutions can reduce the potential effect of negative party identification on satisfaction with democracy.
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 effects of negative identities are not restricted to a mere dislike of the out-group.
“The effects of these negative identities are not restricted to a mere dislike of the out-group.”
From Them’ without ‘us’: Negative identities and affective polarization in Brazil (2022) · cites this paper as Spoon and Kanthak 2019
Negative identities can hamper satisfaction with democracy when the opposition is in power.
“Past research has shown that negative identities can hamper cross-party cooperation (Bankert 2021) and satisfaction with democracy when the opposition is in power (Spoon and Kanthak 2019), spelling a worrying future for the quality and stability of Brazilian democracy.”
From Them’ without ‘us’: Negative identities and affective polarization in Brazil (2022) · cites this paper as Spoon and Kanthak 2019
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Them’ without ‘us’: Negative identities and affective polarization in Brazil
Areal, J. (2022) · Political Research Exchange · doi:10.1080/2474736x.2022.2117635 · Cited by 22 · see citing works
- Authors
- Spoon, J.-J., & Kanthak, K.
- Affiliations
- University of Pittsburgh (US)
- Corresponding author
- Spoon, Jae-Jae
- Venue
- Journal of Elections, Public Opinion and Parties
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2019-09-23
- Volume
- 29
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 511-532
- ISSN
- 1368-9886 (ISSN-L)
- 1745-7289
- 1745-7297
- OpenAlex
- W2975527710
- Cited by
- 20
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 1
- FWCI
- 11.98
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Elections Public Opinion and Parties (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Electoral Systems and Political Participation
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Political Theory and Democracy
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Political Conflict and Governance
- Keywords
- satisfaction with democracy, prime minister, multiparty system, vote margins, governing coalitions, institutional framework, democratic backsliding, Comparative Study of Electoral Systems
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