Search

Public opinion regarding the 1986 Tax Reform Act was observed to become progressively negative after the law was enacted. In contrast, the tax system gained a more favorable public assessment due to the reform. A cognitive model of taxpayer attitudes is presented as an explanation to these conflicting reactions. It was found that tax complexity and difficulties involved in determining its effects diminishes the influence of self-interest in the formation of attitudes and enhances the effect of prior attitudes and discussion.

One of the most problematic aspect of p‐values is the tendency to dichotomize, whereby statistical significance is equated with scientifically worthwhile and insignificance with worthless findings. This article outlines two approaches that move beyond such dichotomies: minimum Bayes factors and the analysis of credibility. Their use is illustrated through a simple example. The examples show that significant findings may not always be as telling as statistical significance would suggest, whereas non‐significant findings may contain considerable evidence about effects. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Right-wing populist parties in European democracies appeal to citizens’ feelings of uncertainty related to globalization by promoting tough immigration laws and curbing the power of the European Union. This article adds to our understanding of how individuals’ risk propensity relates to support for right-wing populist parties and their ideas in the context of globalization. In particular, by drawing on survey data from the United Kingdom we investigate how this personality trait relates to support for the United Kingdom Independence Party and the vote for a British exit from the European Union. The article explores the complex interplay between risk propensity and right-wing populist appeals by dissecting the direct, indirect and total effects of this trait. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We present a model of deliberative inclusion, focusing on reciprocity in the interaction between structural minorities/disadvantaged groups and majorities/privileged groups. Our model, however, comes with a ‘friendly amendment’: we have put the ‘burden of reciprocity’ mainly on majorities and privileged groups. It is mainly their obligation to seriously listen and respond to the demands and arguments of minorities and disadvantaged groups and show a willingness to respect and accommodate these interests. Empirically, we apply our model to the interaction of linguistic groups in the Swiss parliament. We find a highly egalitarian, sometimes even minority-favoring mode of interaction between the German-speaking majority and linguistic minorities. The German-speaking majority seems to be willing to take the ‘burden of reciprocity’ when linguistic minorities’ vital interests are concerned. Conversely, linguistic minorities are slightly more self-referential and adversarial under such conditions. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Political scientists often describe party competition, political behavior or public preferences in left/right terms. Nevertheless, the usefulness of the concepts “left” or “right” is rarely explored. This study assesses whether the left/right continuum resonates with publics in developing Latin American democracies. Using data from the 2008 wave of the Latin American Public Opinion Project (LAPOP), the authors measure variability in left/right self-placement in three Latin American countries, namely, Ecuador, Mexico, and Chile. Building on the approach developed by Alvarez and Brehm for public opinion in the United States, the authors explore (a) the extent to which voters in Ecuador, Mexico, and Chile possess predicable left/right positions and (b) whether predictability can be attributed to individual- and country-level characteristics. At the individual level, the authors show that variability decreases with political sophistication. At the country level, they find that a lower degree of programmatic party system structuration leads to higher levels of response variation. Mapping the variability in left/right preferences provides important insights into the structure of public opinion and contours of political behavior in Latin America and how they differ from those of other regions such as North America. In addition, this study brings to bear important new individual-level insights into recent political developments in the Latin American region, especially the so-called left turn in Latin American politics. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Copyright of Swiss Political Science Review is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The article organizes the diversity in deliberative democracy theory. Two ideal-types are distinguished. Type one deliberation is founded upon the Habermasian logic of communicative action and focuses upon rationality and deliberative intent, distinguishes communicative and strategic action, and has a procedural component. Type one deliberation seeks to obtain understanding or consensus. Type two deliberation focuses on flexibility in discourse, emphasizes outcomes versus process, and focuses on eliminating constraints on normative ideals.

The article discusses various reports published within the issue, including one by Simon Niemeyer and John Dryzek on deliberative democracy in Australia and another by Judith Bara, Albert Weale and Aude Biquelet on the use of computer-assisted textual analysis (CATA) to assess positions of Members of Parliament on abortion in Great Britain.

Copyright of Swiss Political Science Review is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Although expert surveys have gained a prominent place in comparative studies of party positions on issues, their validity has been called into question. In this article, some of the validity concerns are evaluated in the context of the authors' own expert survey on national party positions vis-à-vis European integration. One goal of the article is to demonstrate that this expert survey produces valid measures of party positions. An equally important goal, however, is to suggest some methods that can help in assessing the quality of expert survey data. These methods, which are rooted in psychometric theory, are applicable in a variety of contexts and are easily implemented. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Our research project addressed two questions: (1) are there favorable contexts for deliberation in legislatures? and (2) does deliberation also matter for outcomes? We found that consensus institutions, presidentialism, second chambers, non-publicity, and low-issue polarization further deliberation, particularly by enhancing respectful exchanges among participants. We also found that unanimous or nearly unanimous decisions were typically associated with high-quality deliberation in the preceding debates, while deliberation was almost without any effect on the substantive outcome dimension (conceptualized as more and less egalitarian decisions). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]