There is a substantial literature on the impact of having voting for an electorally victorious party on individual voters’ satisfaction with democracy. Yet, there have been few evaluations as to temporally salient are elections to the satisfaction levels for those who voted for a “winning” party and those who voted for a “losing” party. Using rounds 1–8 of the European Social Surveys, I find evidence from 92 elections in 27 European countries that both the levels of and the difference between satisfaction levels of “winners” and “losers” do not attenuate quickly but rather last almost 5 years. That is, it appears that “winners” are more satisfied with democracy and stay that way. While this confirms earlier, smaller studies, the absence of a causal connection between the time from election and satisfaction levels poses a significant challenge to the current literature about the electoral mechanism of this relationship.
AartsKThomassenJ (2008) Satisfaction with Democracy: Do Institutions Matter?Electoral Studies27 (1): 5–18.
2.
AlesinaACohenGDRoubiniN (1993) Electoral Business Cycle in Industrial Democracies. European Journal of Political Economy9 (1): 1–23.
3.
AndersonCJ (1998) Parties, Party Systems, and Satisfaction with Democratic Performance in the New Europe. Political Studies46 (3): 572–588.
4.
AndersonCJ (2005) Good Questions, Dubious Inferences, and Bad Solutions: Some Further Thoughts on Satisfaction with Democracy. Center on Democratic Performance Working Paper No. 116. Binghamton University, Department of Political Science. Available at: http://cdp.binghamton.edu
5.
AndersonCJGuilloryCA (1997) Political Institutions and Satisfaction with Democracy: A Cross-National Analysis of Consensus and Majoritarian Systems. American Political Science Review91 (1): 66–81.
6.
AndersonCJTverdovaYV (2003) Corruption, Political Allegiances, and Attitudes toward Government in Contemporary Democracies. American Journal of Political Science47 (1): 91–109.
7.
AndersonCJBlaisABowlerS, et al. (2005) Losers’ Consent: Elections and Democratic Legitimacy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
8.
AnderssonSBergmanTErssonS (2019) The European Representative Democracy Data Archive, Release 3. Available at: https://erdda.org/erd/
9.
ArmingeonKWengerVWiedemeierF, et al. (2018) Comparative Political Data Set 1960–2016. Bern: Institute of Political Science, University of Berne.
10.
BanducciSStevensD (2015) Surveys in Context: How Timing in the Electoral Cycle Influences Response Propensity and Satisficing. Public Opinion Quarterly79 (S1): 214–243.
11.
BankertAHuddyLRosemaM (2017) Measuring Partisanship as a Social Identity in Multi-Party Systems. Political Behavior39 (1): 103–132.
12.
BarnesSHKaaseMAllerbackKR, et al. (1979) Political Action: Mass Participation in Five Western Democracies. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
13.
BernsteinRChadhaAMontjoyR (2001) Overreporting Voting: Why It Happens and Why It Matters. Public Opinion Quarterly65 (1): 22–44.
14.
BirchS (2008) Electoral Institutions and Popular Confidence in Electoral Processes: A Cross-National Analysis. Electoral Studies27: 305–320.
15.
BlaisAGélineauF (2007) Winning, Losing and Satisfaction with Democracy. Political Studies55 (2): 425–441.
16.
BoveaVEfthyvouloubGNavascA (2017) Political Cycles in Public Expenditure: Butter vs Guns. Journal of Comparative Economics45 (3): 582–604.
17.
CanacheDMondakJJSeligsonMA (2001) Meaning and Measurement in Cross-National Research on Satisfaction with Democracy. Public Opinion Quarterly65 (4): 506–528.
18.
ClaassenC (2020) Does Public Support Help Democracy Survive?American Journal of Political Science64: 118–134.
19.
ChangEChuY-hWuW-c (2014) Consenting to Lose or Expecting to Win? Intertemporal changes in voters winner–loser status and satisfaction with democracy. In ThomassenJ (ed.) Elections and Democracy: Representation and Accountability. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 232–253.
20.
CuriniLJouWMemoliV (2012) Satisfaction with Democracy and the Winner/loser Debate: The Role of Policy Preferences and past Experience. British Journal of Political Science42 (2): 241–261.
21.
DahlbergSLindeJ (2017) The Dynamics of the Winner–loser Gap in Satisfaction with Democracy: Evidence from a Swedish Citizen Panel. International Political Science Review38 (5): 625–641.
22.
DownsA (1957) An Economic Theory of Democracy. New York: Harper Collins.
23.
EastonD (1975) A Re-Assessment of the Concept of Political Support. British Journal of Political Science5: 435–437.
24.
EsaiassonP (2011) Electoral Losers Revisited—How Citizens React to Defeat at the Ballot Box. Electoral Studies30 (1): 102–113.
25.
European Social Survey (2019) Cumulative File ESS 1–8 Data File Edition 1.0. Bergen: NSD—Norwegian Centre for Research Data, Norway—Data Archive and distributor of ESS data for ESS REIC.
26.
GibsonJLNelsonMJ (2015) Is the U.S. Supreme Court’s Legitimacy Grounded in Performance Satisfaction and Ideology?American Journal of Political Science59: 162–174.
27.
HoogheMDassonnevilleR (2018) A Spiral of Distrust: A Panel Study on the Relation between Political Distrust and Protest Voting in Belgium. Government and Opposition53: 104–130.
28.
KarpJABrockingtonD (2005) Social Desirability and Response Validity: A Comparative Analysis of Overreporting Voter Turnout in Five Countries. Journal of Politics67 (3): 825–840.
29.
KimM (2009) Cross-National Analyses of Satisfaction with Democracy and Ideological Congruence. Journal of Elections, Public Opinion and Parties19 (1): 49–72.
30.
KinderDRRoderick KiewietD (1981) Sociotropic Politics: The American Case. British Journal of Political Science11 (2): 129–161.
31.
Lewis-BeckMS (1986) Comparative Economic Voting: Britain, France, Germany, Italy. American Journal of Political Science30 (2): 315–346.
32.
LindeJEkmanJ (2003) Satisfaction with Democracy: A Note on a Frequently Used Indicator in Comparative Politics. European Journal of Political Research42 (3): 391–408.
33.
LovelessMBinelliC (2018) Economic Expectations and Satisfaction with Democracy: Evidence from Italy. Government and Opposition1–17. Epub ahead of print. DOI: 10.1017/gov.2018.31.
34.
MarchL (2011) Radical Left Parties in Europe. New York, NY: Routledge.
35.
MartinLVanbergG (2003) Wasting Time? The Impact of Ideology and Size on Delay in Coalition Formation. British Journal of Political Science33 (2): 323–332.
36.
MayneQHakhverdianA (2017) Ideological Congruence and Citizen Satisfaction: Evidence from 25 Advanced Democracies. Comparative Political Studies50 (6): 822–849.
37.
MichelitchKUtychS (2018) Electoral Cycle Fluctuations in Partisanship: Global Evidence from Eighty-Six Countries. The Journal of Politics80 (2): 412–427.
38.
MoehlerDCLindbergSI (2009) Narrowing the Legitimacy Gap: Turnovers as a cause of democratic consolidation. Journal of Politics71 (4): 1448–1466.
39.
MuddeC (2007) Populist Radical Right Parties in Europe. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
40.
MuellerJ (1970) Presidential Popularity from Truman to Johnson. American Political Science Review64: 18–34.
41.
MunozJFalco-GimenoAHernandezE (2019) Unexpected Event during Survey Design: Promise and Pitfalls for Causal Inference. Political Analysis1–21. Epub ahead of print. DOI: 10.1017/pan.2019.27.
42.
NorrisP (2018) Do Public Perceptions of Electoral Malpractice Undermine Democratic Satisfaction? The U.S. in Comparative Perspective. Harvard University Kennedy School Faculty Research Working Paper Series, July2018, RWP18-022.
43.
PlesciaC (2019) On the Subjectivity of the Experience of Victory: Who Are the Election Winners?Political Psychology40: 797–814.
44.
RohrschneiderR (1999) Learning Democracy: Democratic and Economic Values in Unified Germany. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
45.
RohrschneiderR (2005) Institutional Quality and Perceptions of Representation in Advanced Industrial Democracies. Comparative Political Studies38 (7): 850–874.
46.
RooduijnMBurgoonBvan ElsasEJ, et al. (2017) Radical Distinction: Support for Radical Left and Radical Right Parties in Europe. European Union Politics18 (4): 536–559.
47.
SarsfieldREchegarayF (2006) Opening the Black Box: How Satisfaction with Democracy and Its Perceived Efficacy Affect Regime Preference in Latin America. International Journal of Public Opinion Research18 (2): 153–173.
48.
SinghSThorntonJR (2019) Elections Activate Partisanship across Countries. American Political Science Review113: 248–253.
49.
SinghSKarakocEBlaisA (2012) Differentiating Winners: How Elections Affect Satisfaction with Democracy. Electoral Studies31 (1): 201–211.
50.
SinghSP (2014) Not All Election Winners Are Equal: Satisfaction with Democracy and the Nature of the Vote. European Journal of Political Research53 (2): 308–327.
51.
StiersDDaoustJ-FBlaisA (2018) What Makes People Believe That Their Party Won the Election?Electoral Studies55: 21–29.
52.
Van der MeerTWGSteenvoordenEH (2018) Going Back to the Well: A Panel Study into the Election Boost of Political Support among Electoral Winners and Losers. Electoral Studies55: 40–53.
53.
Van HamCThomassenJAartsK, et al. (2017) Myth and Reality of the Legitimacy Crisis: Explaining Trends and Cross-National Differences in Established Democracies. Oxford University Press.
54.
Worldwide Governance Indicators (2017) Aggregate Indicators of Governance 1996–2017. Available at: www.govindicators.org
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.
