The DOI matches its Crossref record; 42 of the 42 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Themes and Variations: Taking Stock of the Advocacy Coalition Framework
Abstract
A policy process framework that has been developed to simplify the complexity of public policy is the advocacy coalition framework (ACF). This essay reports on an analysis of 80 applications of the ACF spanning nearly 20 years. The review shows that the ACF is applicable to various substantive topics, across various geographical areas, and with other policy process theories and frameworks, including the stages heuristic. The most commonly tested hypotheses involve policy change, learning, and coalition stability. Although the hypotheses tend to be confirmed, questions remain about the membership, stability, and defection of coalition members; about the causal mechanisms linking external events and policy change; and about the conditions that facilitate cross‐coalition learning. Emerging areas of research include policy subsystem interdependencies and coordination within, and between, coalitions.
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
Lord, C. G., Ross, L., & Lepper, M. R. (1979) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.37.11.2098 · Cited by 4,583
(1996) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511803987 · Cited by 3,809
Policy Change and Learning: An Advocacy Coalition Approach
Roberts, A., Sabatier, P. A., & Jenkins-Smith, H. C. (1994) · Canadian Public Policy / Analyse de Politiques · doi:10.2307/3551961 · Cited by 3,628
Self-citationAn advocacy coalition framework of policy change and the role of policy-oriented learning therein
Sabatier, P. A. (1988) · Policy Sciences · doi:10.1007/bf00136406 · Cited by 3,570
Self-citationPatterns of democracy: government forms and performance in thirty-six countries
(2000) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.37-4738 · Cited by 2,990
Sabatier, P. A. (1986) · Journal of Public Policy · doi:10.1017/s0143814x00003846 · Cited by 1,863
Self-citationHuman Nature in Politics: The Dialogue of Psychology with Political Science
Simon, H. A. (1985) · American Political Science Review · doi:10.2307/1956650 · Cited by 1,359
Contrasting Rational and Psychological Analyses of Political Choice
Quattrone, G. A., & Tversky, A. (1988) · American Political Science Review · doi:10.2307/1962487 · Cited by 877
The Advocacy Coalition Framework
Sabatier, P. A., & Weible, C. M. (2019) · Theories of the Policy Process · doi:10.4324/9780367274689-7 · Cited by 810
Self-citationThe Consensus Building Handbook: A Comprehensive Guide to Reaching Agreement
Susskind, L., McKearnan, S., & Thomas-Larmer, J. (1999) · Sage eBooks · doi:10.4135/9781452231389 · Cited by 730
Cited by
A taxonomy of behaviour change methods: an Intervention Mapping approach
Kok, G., Gottlieb, N. H., Peters, G.-J. Y., Mullen, P. D., Parcel, G. S., Ruiter, R. A. C., Fernández, M. E., Markham, C., & Bartholomew, L. K. (2016) · Health Psychology Review · doi:10.1080/17437199.2015.1077155 · Cited by 1,137
Nilsen, P., Ståhl, C., Roback, K., & Cairney, P. (2013) · Implementation Science · doi:10.1186/1748-5908-8-63 · Cited by 346
Changing Behavior Using the Model of Action Phases
Keller, L., Gollwitzer, P. M., & Sheeran, P. (2020) · The Handbook of Behavior Change · doi:10.1017/9781108677318.006 · Cited by 147
Metadata
- Authors
- Weible, C. M., Sabatier, P. A., & McQueen, K.
- Venue
- Policy Studies Journal
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2009-02
- Volume
- 37
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 121-140
- ISSN
- 0190-292X (ISSN-L)
- 1541-0072
- OpenAlex
- W2109332867
- Cited by
- 837
- References
- 42
- FWCI
- 172.46
- 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: Themes and Variations: Taking Stock of the Advocacy Coalition Framework. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1541-0072.2008.00299.x
- The paper
- Weible, C. M., Sabatier, P. A., & McQueen, K. (2009). Themes and Variations: Taking Stock of the Advocacy Coalition Framework. Policy Studies Journal. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1541-0072.2008.00299.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.
