Cited by 1,439Electoral Systems and Political ParticipationPolitical Theory and DemocracyPolitical Conflict and Governance

Linkages between Citizens and Politicians in Democratic Polities

Kitschelt, Herbert·2000·Comparative Political Studies

Abstract

Research on democratic party competition in the formal spatial tradition of Downs and the comparative-historical tradition of Lipset and Rokkan assumes that linkages of accountability and responsiveness between voters and political elites work through politicians’ programmatic appeals and policy achievements. This ignores, however, alternative voter-elite linkages through the personal charisma of political leaders and, more important, selective material incentives in networks of direct exchange (clientelism). In light of the diversity of linkage mechanisms appearing in new democracies and changing linkages in established democracies, this article explores theories of linkage choice. It first develops conceptual definitions of charismatic, clientelist, and programmatic linkages between politicians and electoral constituencies. It then asks whether politicians face a trade-off or mutual reinforcement in employing linkage mechanisms. The core section of the article details developmentalist, statist, institutional, political-economic, and cultural-ideological theories of citizen-elite linkage formation in democracies, showing that none of the theories is fully encompassing. The final section considers empirical measurement problems in comparative research on linkage.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/001041400003300607

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Brazil displays none of the features of highly institutionalized party systems, programmatic patterns of political competition, strong linkages between social groups and political parties, and entrenched and stable partisan identities.

    “Like most of Latin American (Kitschelt et al. 2010) and Eastern European (Rose and Mishler 1998) countries, Brazil displays none of the above features.”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Kitschelt, H.
Affiliations
Duke University (US)
Corresponding author
Kitschelt, Herbert
Venue
Comparative Political Studies
Published
2000-09
Volume
33
Issue
6-7
Pages
845-879
ISSN
  • 0010-4140 (ISSN-L)
  • 1552-3829
OpenAlex
W2063757851
Cited by
1,439
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 62 · 2025: 65 · 2024: 65 · 2023: 69 · 2022: 51 · 2021: 91 · 2020: 140 · 2019: 162 · 2018: 128 · 2017: 38 · 2016: 70 · 2015: 51 · 2014: 51 · 2013: 58 · 2012: 48
FWCI
42.48
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Comparative Political Studies (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Electoral Systems and Political Participation
  • Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Political Theory and Democracy
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Political Conflict and Governance
Keywords
clientelism, charismatic leadership, accountability, responsiveness, new democracies, political elites, institutional theory

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