The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Ideas and Institutional Change in Social Security: Conversion, Layering, and Policy Drift*
Abstract
Objectives.In recent years, social scientists such as Kathleen Thelen and Jacob Hacker have introduced new concepts to assist in the understanding of institutional change. Fostering some of these concepts, this article proceeds to augment the theoretical debate on institutional change in social science and policy research. A discussion of Social Security development in the United States advances the article's main objective: to uncover the relationship between ideational processes and policy development. Methods.Qualitative and historical analysis is offered to examine three major policy episodes: the enactment of the 1939 amendments, the first mandate of the Nixon Administration (1969–1972), and the push for Social Security privatization that emerged in the 1990s. Results.First, the analysis suggests that, through the process of institutional conversion, the 1939 amendments and the Nixon‐era reforms altered the nature of Social Security. Second, the discussion on Social Security privatization stresses the impact of layering and policy drift on public and private pensions. Conclusions.The concepts of conversion, layering, and policy drift receive further empirical support through the presented analysis. Moreover, this article suggests that, for a full understanding of institutional change, a systematic analysis of ideational processes is necessary.
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
Policy paradigms, social learning, and the state: The case of economic policymaking in Britain
Hall, P. A. (1993) · Comparative Politics · doi:10.2307/422246 · Cited by 7,369
Political Science and the Three New Institutionalisms
Hall, P. A., & Taylor, R. C. R. (1996) · Political Studies · doi:10.1111/j.1467-9248.1996.tb00343.x · Cited by 6,796
Politics in Time: History, Institutions, and Social Analysis
Pierson, P. (2004) · doi:10.1515/9781400841080 · Cited by 4,957
HACKER, J. S. (2004) · American Political Science Review · doi:10.1017/s0003055404001121 · Cited by 1,543
Cited by
Design Principles for Policy Mixes: Cohesion and Coherence in ‘New Governance Arrangements’
Howlett, M., & Rayner, J. (2007) · Policy and Society · doi:10.1016/s1449-4035(07)70118-2 · Cited by 687
Drift and conversion: hidden faces of institutional change
Hacker, J. S., Pierson, P., & Thelen, K. (2015) · Advances in Comparative-Historical Analysis · doi:10.1017/cbo9781316273104.008 · Cited by 393
Patching vs Packaging in Policy Formulation: Assessing Policy Portfolio Design
Howlett, M., & Rayner, J. (2013) · Politics and Governance · doi:10.17645/pag.v1i2.95 · Cited by 353
Institutional Layering: A Review of the Use of the Concept
van der Heijden, J. (2011) · Politics · doi:10.1111/j.1467-9256.2010.01397.x · Cited by 291
Li, L., & Taeihagh, A. (2020) · Applied Energy · doi:10.1016/j.apenergy.2020.114611 · Cited by 184
Metadata
- Authors
- Béland, D.
- Venue
- Social Science Quarterly
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2007-03
- Volume
- 88
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 20-38
- ISSN
- 0038-4941 (ISSN-L)
- 1540-6237
- OpenAlex
- W1998762267
- Cited by
- 304
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 52.22
- 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: Ideas and Institutional Change in Social Security: Conversion, Layering, and Policy Drift*. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1540-6237.2007.00444.x
- The paper
- Béland, D. (2007). Ideas and Institutional Change in Social Security: Conversion, Layering, and Policy Drift*. Social Science Quarterly. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6237.2007.00444.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.