Social policy responsiveness in developed democracies
Abstract
Do mass policy preferences influence the policy output of welfare states in developed democracies? This is an important issue for welfare state theory and research, and this article presents an analysis that builds from analytical innovations developed in the emerging literature on linkages between mass opinion and public policy. The authors analyze a new dataset combining a measure of social policy preferences with data on welfare state spending, alongside controls for established causal factors behind social policy-making. The analysis provides evidence that policy preferences exert a significant influence over welfare state output. Guided also by statistical tests for endogeneity, the authors find that cross-national differences in the level of policy preferences help to account for a portion of the differences among social, Christian, and liberal welfare state regimes. The results have implications for developing fruitful connections between welfare state scholarship, comparative opinion research, and recent opinion/policy studies.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Aggregate public opinion does not seem to be a compelling determinant of welfare state output.
“In any case, aggregate public opinion-i.e., support averaged across the whole population-does not seem to be a compelling determinant of welfare state output.”
From COVID-19 and welfare state support: the case of universal basic income (2022) · cites this paper as Brooks and Manza (2006)
Cites
Specification Tests in Econometrics
Hausman, J. A. (1978) · Econometrica · doi:10.2307/1913827 · Cited by 18,820 · see citing works
What To Do (and Not to Do) with Time-Series Cross-Section Data
Beck, N., & Katz, J. N. (1995) · American Political Science Review · doi:10.2307/2082979 · Cited by 6,840 · see citing works
The Transition from Capitalism to Socialism
Stephens, J. D. (1979) · doi:10.1007/978-1-349-16171-3 · Cited by 1,184 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Parenthood and happiness: effects of work-family reconciliation policies in 22 OECD countries
Glass, J., Simon, R. W., & Andersson, M. A. (2016) · American Journal of Sociology · doi:10.1086/688892 · Cited by 296 · see citing works
COVID-19 and welfare state support: the case of universal basic income
Weisstanner, D. (2022) · Policy and Society · doi:10.1093/polsoc/puab015 · Cited by 40 · see citing works
Welfare States and Public Opinion
Myles, J. (2006) · American Sociological Review · doi:10.1177/000312240607100307 · Cited by 21 · see citing works
- Authors
- Brooks, C., & Manza, J.
- Affiliations
- Indiana University, Bloomington
- Northwestern University (US)
- ORCID
- Manza, Jeff
- Venue
- American Sociological Review
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2006-06
- Volume
- 71
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 474-494
- ISSN
- 0003-1224 (ISSN-L)
- 1939-8271
- OpenAlex
- W2124600012
- Cited by
- 358
- References
- 3
- Citations by year
- 2026: 9 · 2025: 28 · 2024: 30 · 2023: 16 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 19 · 2020: 43 · 2019: 12 · 2018: 22 · 2017: 23 · 2016: 24 · 2015: 22 · 2014: 14 · 2013: 16 · 2012: 16
- FWCI
- 54.92
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- American Sociological Review (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Social Policy and Reform Studies
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Electoral Systems and Political Participation
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Policy Transfer and Learning
- Keywords
- social policy preferences, social spending, policy responsiveness, welfare regimes, liberal welfare regime, public opinion, endogeneity, advanced democracies
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