The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Parchment, Equilibria, and Institutions
Abstract
Institutions are rules that constrain political behavior. Although there is consensus that being written down is neither necessary nor sufficient for an institution to be effective, much research on comparative institutions focuses on formal, parchment, institutions. This article argues that parchment can contribute to the generation of shared mutual expectations among political actors, which are essential to the effectiveness of institutions. Next, the article distinguishes between research that emphasizes the role of institutions in aggregating preferences into political decisions and research that relies on coordination models to identify conditions favoring certain equilibrium outcomes when multiple equilibria are possible. The article notes the increasing prominence of such coordination models in research on comparative institutions and concludes with some reflections about the prospects for this trend to foster connections between institutional analysis and the field of comparative politics more broadly.
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
Cited by
Informal Institutions and Comparative Politics: A Research Agenda
Helmke, G., & Levitsky, S. (2004) · Perspectives on Politics · doi:10.1017/s1537592704040472 · Cited by 3,175
An Empirical Evaluation of Explanations for State Repression
HILL, D. W., & JONES, Z. M. (2014) · American Political Science Review · doi:10.1017/s0003055414000306 · Cited by 450
What accountability pressures do MPs in Africa face and how do they respond? Evidence from Ghana
Lindberg, S. I. (2010) · The Journal of Modern African Studies · doi:10.1017/s0022278x09990243 · Cited by 317
Making Constitutions: Presidents, Parties, and Institutional Choice in Latin America
Negretto, G. L. (2013) · doi:10.1017/cbo9781139207836 · Cited by 239
Constraining Dictatorship: From Personalized Rule to Institutionalized Regimes
Meng, A. (2020) · doi:10.1017/9781108877497 · Cited by 215
Metadata
- Authors
- Carey, J. M.
- Venue
- Comparative Political Studies
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2000-09
- Volume
- 33
- Issue
- 6-7
- Pages
- 735-761
- ISSN
- 0010-4140 (ISSN-L)
- 1552-3829
- OpenAlex
- W1966497081
- Cited by
- 304
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 48.25
- 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: Parchment, Equilibria, and Institutions. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/001041400003300603
- The paper
- Carey, J. M. (2000). Parchment, Equilibria, and Institutions. Comparative Political Studies. https://doi.org/10.1177/001041400003300603
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.