The DOI matches its Crossref record; 28 of the 28 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Winning, Losing and Satisfaction with Democracy
Abstract
Previous research has shown that those who won an election are more satisfied with the way democracy works than those who lost. What is not clear, however, is whether it is the fact of winning (losing), per se, that generates (dis)satisfaction with democracy. The current study explores this winner/loser gap with the use of the 1997 Canadian federal election panel study. It makes a theoretical and methodological contribution to our understanding of the factors that foster satisfaction with democracy. At the theoretical level, we argue that voters gain different utility from winning at the constituency and national levels in a parliamentary system, and that their expectations about whether they will win or lose affect their degree of satisfaction with democracy. On the methodological front, our analysis includes a control group (non-voters) and incorporates a control for the level of satisfaction prior to the election. The results indicate that the effect of winning and losing on voters' satisfaction with democracy is significant even when controlling for ex ante satisfaction before the election takes place, and that the outcome of the election in the local constituency matters as much as the outcome of the national election. They fail to show, however, that expectations about the outcome of the election play a significant role in shaping satisfaction with democracy.
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
Rational Expectations and the Theory of Price Movements
Muth, J. F. (1961) · Econometrica · doi:10.2307/1909635 · Cited by 5,594
Dalton, R. J. (2004) · doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199268436.001.0001 · Cited by 1,372
Anderson, C. J., & Guillory, C. A. (1997) · American Political Science Review · doi:10.2307/2952259 · Cited by 1,239
(2005) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.42-4265 · Cited by 980
Clarke, H. D., Sanders, D., Stewart, M. C., & Whiteley, P. (2004) · doi:10.1093/019924488x.001.0001 · Cited by 921
Losers' Consent: Elections and Democratic Legitimacy
Anderson, C. J., Blais, A., Bowler, S., Donovan, T., & Listhaug, O. (2005) · doi:10.1093/0199276382.001.0001 · Cited by 820
Self-citationMapping Political Support in the 1990s: A Global Analysis
Klingemann, H. (1999) · Critical Citizens · doi:10.1093/0198295685.003.0002 · Cited by 681
Satisfaction with democracy: A note on a frequently used indicator in comparative politics
Linde, J., & Ekman, J. (2003) · European Journal of Political Research · doi:10.1111/1475-6765.00089 · Cited by 614
Losers' Consent: Elections and Democratic Legitimacy
Anderson, C. J. (2005) · Cited by 569
Meaning and Measurement in Cross-National Research on Satisfaction with Democracy
Canache, D., Mondak, J. J., & Seligson, M. A. (2001) · Public Opinion Quarterly · doi:10.1086/323576 · Cited by 527
Cited by
Political Trust in a Cynical Age
Citrin, J., & Stoker, L. (2018) · Annual Review of Political Science · doi:10.1146/annurev-polisci-050316-092550 · Cited by 722
Affective Polarization in Multiparty Systems
Wagner, M. (2021) · Electoral Studies · doi:10.1016/j.electstud.2020.102199 · Cited by 593
The quality of institutions and satisfaction with democracy in Western Europe — A panel analysis
Wagner, A. F., Schneider, F., & Halla, M. (2009) · European Journal of Political Economy · doi:10.1016/j.ejpoleco.2008.08.001 · Cited by 272
White Racial Solidarity and Opposition to American Democracy
Jardina, A., & Mickey, R. (2022) · The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science · doi:10.1177/00027162211069730 · Cited by 64
Justwan, F., Baumgaertner, B., Carlisle, J. E., Clark, A. K., & Clark, M. (2018) · Journal of Elections, Public Opinion and Parties · doi:10.1080/17457289.2018.1434784 · Cited by 61
Metadata
- Authors
- Blais, A., & Gélineau, F.
- Venue
- Political Studies
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2007-06
- Volume
- 55
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 425-441
- ISSN
- 0032-3217 (ISSN-L)
- 1467-9248
- OpenAlex
- W1993021756
- Cited by
- 345
- References
- 28
- FWCI
- 14.62
- Type
- journal article
- 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: Winning, Losing and Satisfaction with Democracy. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1467-9248.2007.00659.x
- The paper
- Blais, A., & Gélineau, F. (2007). Winning, Losing and Satisfaction with Democracy. Political Studies. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9248.2007.00659.x
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.