Abstract
This paper takes issue with the widespread assumption of constancy in the meaning and measurement of party identification over time and space. It holds that the partisan dealignment common to established democracies has eroded the validity of the Michigan scale’s assumption that voters can identify with only one party, arguing instead that dealignment can encourage secondary attachments to other parties. To persist with an exclusivist conceptualization of party identification under these conditions is shown to risk the misspecification of voting models since the effects of these secondary attachments can be misleadingly attributed to short‐term influences, like leaders, associated with those parties. The dynamics of the voting decision can thereby be seriously distorted. The force of this argument is demonstrated through a comparison of general election outcomes in relatively aligned Australia and relatively dealigned Great Britain.
Published Version
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call