The ideological congruence controversy: The impact of alternative measures, data, and time periods on the effects of election rules

169Citations
Citations of this article
95Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

Focusing on the left-right scale as a summary measure of citizens' and representatives' preferences, a growing body of literature has used a variety of approaches and data in measuring positions of citizens and representatives. The most recent studies, contrary to previous ones, show no significant difference between ideological congruence in single member district (SMD) and proportional representation (PR) electoral systems. This article examines the major alternative measurement approaches and data sets, finding that recent results are due to differences in time period, not differences in measurement approach. The associations between election rules and ideological congruence are relatively robust to various measurement approaches, as are estimations of the causal processes shaping ideological congruence. The association between election rules and congruence has declined in the past decade, as shown by all three major approaches, due primarily to convergence toward the median of plurality parties in the SMD elections. © 2009 SAGE Publications.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Powell, G. B. (2009). The ideological congruence controversy: The impact of alternative measures, data, and time periods on the effects of election rules. Comparative Political Studies, 42(12), 1475–1497. https://doi.org/10.1177/0010414009332147

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free