Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 252

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 143 of the 143 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Constitutional Design: Proposals Versus Processes

Horowitz, Donald L.·2002·The Architecture of Democracy
DOI 10.1093/0199246467.003.0002
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

The essence of democracy is that it is indigenous, and the practice over importing a model of democratic governance from outside virtually assures its non‐democratic character, unless a very circumspect approach is adopted. Nor is there a clear theoretical consensus within the developed countries themselves. This chapter sets out the author's basic objections to the theory of consociationalism, and his reasons for preferring an incentives‐based approach to encouraging accommodative behaviour over power‐sharing.

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.

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

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/0199246467.003.0002

Cites

143 of 143 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

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

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

Show all 143 references

Cited by

See all 252

Metadata

Authors
Horowitz, D. L.
Venue
The Architecture of Democracy
Publisher
Oxford University PressOxford
Published
2002-03-14
Pages
15-36
DOI
10.1093/0199246467.003.0002
OpenAlex
W1476075615
Cited by
252
References
143
FWCI
14.79
Type
book chapter
Language
en
Open access
closed

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: Constitutional Design: Proposals Versus Processes. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/0199246467.003.0002
The paper
Horowitz, D. L. (2002). Constitutional Design: Proposals Versus Processes. The Architecture of Democracy. https://doi.org/10.1093/0199246467.003.0002

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.