The sudden and perhaps unexpected appearance of populist parties in the 1990s shows no sign of immediately vanishing. The lion’s share of the research on populism has focused on defining populism, on the causes for its rise and continued success, and more recently on its influence on government and on public policy. Less research has, however, been conducted on measuring populist attitudes among voters. In this article, we seek to fill this gap by measuring populist attitudes and to investigate whether these attitudes can be linked with party preferences. We distinguish three political attitudes: (1) populist attitudes, (2) pluralist attitudes, and (3) elitist attitudes. We devise a measurement of these attitudes and explore their validity by way of using a principal component analysis on a representative Dutch data set (N = 600). We indeed find three statistically separate scales of political attitudes. We further validated the scales by testing whether they are linked to party preferences and find that voters who score high on the populist scale have a significantly higher preference for the Dutch populist parties, the Party for Freedom, and the Socialist Party.
AkkermanT. (2012). Comparing radical right parties in government: Immigration and integration policies in nine countries (1996-2010). West European Politics, 35, 511-529.
2.
AlbertazziD.McDonnellD. (2005). The Lega Nord in the second Berlusconi government: In a league of its own. West European Politics, 28, 952-972.
3.
AlbertazziD.McDonnellD. (2008a). Introduction: The sceptre and the spectre. In AlbertazziD.McDonnellD. (Eds.), Twenty-first century populism: The spectre of Western European democracy (pp. 1-11). Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
4.
AlbertazziD.McDonnellD. (Eds.). (2008b). Twenty-first century populism: The spectre of Western European democracy. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
5.
AlbertazziD.McDonnellD. (2010). The Lega Nord back in government. West European Politics, 33, 1318-1340.
6.
AndewegR. B.De WinterL.MüllerW. C. (2008). Parliamentary opposition in post-consociational democracies: Austria, Belgium and the Netherlands. Journal of Legislative Studies, 14, 77-112.
7.
AxelrodR. (1967). The structure of public opinion on policy issues. Public Opinion Quarterly, 31, 51-60.
8.
BaleT. (2012). Supplying the insatiable demand: Europe’s populist radical right. Government and Opposition, 47, 256-274.
9.
BarrR. R. (2009). Populists, outsiders and anti-establishment politics. Party Politics, 15, 29-48.
10.
BetzH. G. (2002). Conditions favoring the success and failure of radical right-wing populist parties in contemporary democracies. In MényY.SurelY. (Eds.), Democracies and the populist challenge (pp. 197-213). Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave.
11.
CanovanM. (1981). Populism. New York, NY: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
12.
De LangeS. L.RooduijnM. (2011). Een populistiche tijdgeest in Nederland? Een inhoudsanalyse van de verkiezingsprogramma’s van politieke partijen [A populist zeitgeist in the Netherlands? A content analysis of the election programs of political parties]. In AndewegR.ThomassenJ. (Eds.), Democratie doorgelicht: Het functioneren van de Nederlandse democratie (pp. 319-334). Leiden, the Netherlands: Leiden University Press.
13.
DoyleD. (2011). The legitimacy of political institutions: Explaining contemporary populism in Latin America. Comparative Political Studies, 44, 1447-1473.
14.
ElchardusM.SpruytB. (2012). Populisme en de zorg over de samenleving [Populism and the concerns over the society]. Sociologie, 8, 107-126.
15.
FieschiC.HeywoodP. (2004). Trust, cynicism, and populist anti-politics. Journal of Political Ideologies, 9, 289-309.
16.
FilcD. (2010). The political right in Israel: Different faces of Jewish populism. London, England: Routledge.
17.
FortuynP. (2002). De puinhopen van acht jaar Paars [The wreckage of eight purple years.]. Uithoorn, the Netherlands: Karakter.
18.
GoertzG. (2006). Social science concepts: A user’s guide. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
19.
HawkinsK. A. (2009). Is Chávez populist? Measuring populist discourse in comparative perspective. Comparative Political Studies, 42, 1040-1067.
20.
HawkinsK. A.RidingS.MuddeC. (2012). Measuring populist attitudes. Political Concepts Committee on Concepts and Methods Working Paper Series, 55, 1-35.
21.
HibbingJ. R.Theiss-MorseE. (2002). Stealth democracy: Americans’ beliefs about how government should work. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
22.
IonescuG.GellnerE. (1969). Populism: Its meanings and national characteristics. London, England: Weidenfeld & Nicolson.
23.
IvarsflatenE. (2008). What unites right-wing populists in Western Europe? Re-examining grievance mobilization models in seven successful cases. Comparative Political Studies, 41, 3-23.
24.
KitscheltH. (2002). Popular dissatisfaction with democracy: Populism and party systems. In MényY.SurelY. (Eds.), Democracies and the populist challenge (pp. 179-196). Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
25.
LucardieP. (2008). The Netherlands: Populism versus pillarization. In AlbertazziD.McDonnellD. (Eds.), Twenty-first century populism: The spectre of Western European democracy (pp. 151-165). Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave.
26.
LucardieP.VoermanG. (2012). Populisten in de polder [Populists in the polder]. Meppel, the Netherlands: Boom.
27.
MairP. (2002). Populist democracy vs. party democracy. In MényY.SurelY. (Eds.), Democracies and the populist challenge (pp. 81-98). Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave.
28.
MarchL. (2011). Radical left parties in Europe. London, England: Routledge.
29.
MényY.SurelY. (2002a). The constitutive ambiguity of populism. In MényY.SurelY. (Eds.), Democracies and the populist challenge (pp. 1-21). Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave.
30.
MényY.SurelY. (2002b). Democracies and the populist challenge. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave.
31.
MuddeC. (2004). The populist zeitgeist. Government and Opposition, 39, 542-563.
32.
MuddeC. (2007). Populist radical right parties in Europe. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
33.
MuddeC.Rovira KaltwasserC. (2012a). Populism and (liberal) democracy: A framework for analysis. In MuddeC.KaltwasserC. R. (Eds.), Populism in Europe and the Americas: Threat or corrective for democracy? (pp. 1-26). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
34.
MuddeC.Rovira KaltwasserC. (Eds.). (2012b). Populism in Europe and the Americas: Threat or corrective for democracy?Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
35.
MuddeC.Rovira KaltwasserC. (2013). Exclusionary vs. inclusionary populism: Comparing contemporary Europe and Latin America. Government and Opposition, 48, 147-174.
36.
MuddeC.Rovira KaltwasserC. (in press). Populism and leadership. In ‘t HartP.RhodesR. (Eds.), Oxford handbook of political leadership. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
37.
NorrisP. (2005). Radical right: Voters and parties in the electoral market. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
38.
OeschD. (2008). Explaining workers’ support for right-wing populist parties in Western Europe: Evidence from Austria, Belgium, France, Norway, and Switzerland. International Political Science Review, 29, 349-373.
39.
PauwelsT. (2011a). Measuring populism: A quantitative text analysis of party literature in Belgium. Journal of Elections, Public Opinion and Parties, 21, 97-119.
40.
PauwelsT. (2011b). Explaining the strange decline of the populist radical right Vlaams Belang in Belgium: The impact of permanent opposition. Acta Politica, 46, 60-82.
41.
PellikaanH.De LangeS. L.Van der MeerT. (2007). Fortuyn’s legacy: Party system change in the Netherlands. Comparative European Politics, 5, 282-302.
42.
PlattnerM. F. (2010). Populism, pluralism, and liberal democracy. Journal of Democracy, 21, 81-92.
43.
RemmerK. L. (2012). The rise of leftist-populist governance in Latin America: The roots of electoral change. Comparative Political Studies, 45, 947-972.
44.
RobertsK. M. (1995). Neoliberalism and the transformation of populism in Latin America: The Peruvian case. World Politics, 48, 82-116.
RooduijnM.PauwelsT. (2011). Measuring populism: Comparing two methods of content analysis. West European Politics, 34, 1272-1283.
47.
RydgrenJ.van HolsteynJ. J. M. (2005). Holland and Pim Fortuyn: A deviant case or the beginning of something new? In RydgrenJ. (Ed.), Movements of exclusion: Radical right-wing populism in the Western world (pp. 41-59). Hauppauge, NY: Nova Science.
48.
SartoriG. (1970). Concept misformation in comparative politics. American Political Science Review, 64, 1033-1053.
49.
SkocpolT.WilliamsonV. (2012). The tea party and the remaking of republican conservatism. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
50.
StanleyB. (2011). Populism, nationalism, or national populism? An analysis of Slovak voting behavior at the 2010 parliamentary election. Communist and Post-Communist Studies, 44, 257-270.
51.
TaggartP. (2000). Populism. Buckingham, UK: Open University Press.
52.
TaggartP. (2002). Populism and the pathology of representative politics. In MényY.SurelY. (Eds.), Democracies and the populist challenge (pp. 62-80). Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave.
53.
VossenK. (2010). Populism in the Netherlands after Fortuyn: Rita Verdonk and Geert Wilders compared. Perspectives on European Politics and Society, 11, 22-38.
54.
WeylandK. (1996). Neopopulism and neoliberalism in Latin America: Unexpected affinities. Studies in Comparative International Development, 31, 3-31.
55.
WeylandK. (2001). Clarifying a contested concept: Populism in the study of Latin American politics. Comparative Politics, 34, 1-22.
56.
ZasloveA. (2008). Here to stay? Populism as a new party type. European Review, 16, 319-336.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
