The article compares the effect of political majority and minority status on attitudes toward government in mature and newly established democracies. Specifically, it examines whether being in the majority translates into more positive attitudes toward government than being in the minority. Using surveys conducted by the International Social Survey Project (ISSP) in 12 democracies in 1996, it finds that being in the majority generally translates into more positive attitudes toward government. However, this effect is not of uniform magnitude across countries, nor does it affect all attitudes toward government equally. Specifically, the data show that being in the political majority or minority strongly affects attitudes toward the performance of the political system and the power of government, but does not affect people's levels of political efficacy in systematic ways.
Abelson, R.P. and M.J. Rosenberg (1958). “Symbolic Psycho-logic: A Model of Attitudinal Cognition.”Behavioral Science, 3: 1-13.
2.
Anderson, C.J. and C.A. Guillory (1997). “Political Institutions and Satisfaction with Democracy: A Cross-National Analysis of Consensus and Majoritarian Systems.”American Political Science Review, 91: 66-81.
3.
Anderson, C.J. and A.J. LoTempio (1999). “Winning, Losing, and Political Trust in America.” Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, Atlanta, GA, September.
4.
Balch, G.J. (1974). “Multiple Indicators in Survey Research: The Concept `Sense of Political Efficacy'.”Political Methodology, 1: 1-43.
5.
Brehm, J.W. (1962). “Motivational Effects of Cognitive Dissonance.” In Explorations in Cognitive Dissonance (J.W. Brehm and A.R. Cohen, eds.), 131-159. New York: Wiley & Sons.
6.
Campbell, A. , G.Gurin, and W.E. Miller (1954). The Voter Decides. Evanston, IL: Row, Peterson.
7.
Citrin, J. and D.Green (1986). “Presidential Leadership and the Resurgence of Trust in Government.”British Journal of Political Science, 16: 431-453.
8.
Clarke, H.D. and A.C. Acock (1989). “National Elections and Political Attitudes: The Case of Political Efficacy.”British Journal of Political Science, 19: 551-562.
9.
Clarke, H.D. and A. Kornberg (1992). “Do National Elections Affect Perceptions of MP Responsiveness: A Note on the Canadian Case.”Legislative Studies Quarterly, 17: 183-204.
10.
Dahl, R. (1971). Polyarchy. New Haven: Yale University Press.
11.
Donovan, T. and S. Bowler (2000). “Direct Democracy, Political Efficacy, and Cynicism.” Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association, Chicago, IL, April.
12.
Easton, D. (1953). The Political System: An Inquiry into the State of Political Science. New York: Knopf.
13.
Easton, D. (1965). A Systems Analysis of Political Life. New York: John Wiley.
14.
Easton, D. (1975). “A Re-Assessment of the Concept of Political Support.”British Journal of Political Science, 5: 435-437.
15.
Festinger, L. (1957). A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
16.
Festinger, L. (1964). Conflict, Decision, and Dissonance. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
17.
Finkel, S.E. , E.N. Muller, and M.A. Seligson (1989). “Economic Crisis, Incumbent Performance and Regime Support: A Comparison of Longitudinal Data from West Germany and Costa Rica.”British Journal of Political Science, 19: 329-351.
18.
Frenkel, O. and A. Doob (1976). “Postdecision Dissonance at the Polling Booth.”Canadian Journal of Behavioral Science, 8: 347-350.
19.
Fuchs, D. , G.Guidorossi, and P. Svensson (1995). “Support for the Democratic System.” In Citizens and the State (H.D.Klingemann and D.Fuchs, eds.), 323-353. New York: Oxford University Press.
20.
Gabriel, O.W. (1989). “Regierungswechsel und politische Unterstützung: Implikationen des Parteienwettbewerbs für die Struktur politischer Unterstützung in der Demokratie.”Politische Vierteljahresschrift, 30: 75-93.
21.
Gibson, J.L. (2000). “Being Democratic in a Deeply Divided Society: Racial, Ethnic, Linguistic Conflict Over Democratic Values in the New South Africa.” Paper prepared for presentation at the Annual Meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association, Chicago, IL, April.
22.
Ginsberg, B. and R..Weissberg (1978). “Elections and the Mobilization of Popular Support.”American Journal of Political Science, 22: 31-55.
23.
Guinier, L. (1998). Lift Every Voice. New York: Simon & Schuster.
24.
Holmberg, S. (1999). “Down and Down We Go: Political Trust in Sweden.” In Critical Citizens: Global Support for Democratic Government (P.Norris, ed.), 103-122. New York: Oxford University Press.
25.
Huntington, S. (1991). The Third Wave: Democratization in the Late Twentieth Century. Norman, OK: University of Oklahoma Press.
26.
International Social Survey Program (ISSP) (1996). Computer file. Ann Arbor, MI: ICPSR.
27.
Jaggers, K. and T.R. Gurr (1995). “Tracking Democracy's Third Wave with the Polity III Data.”Journal of Peace Research, 32: 469-482.
28.
Joslyn, M.R. (1998). “Opinion Change After the Election.” Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, Boston, September.
29.
Joslyn, M.R. (1999). “The Impact of Elections on Popular Beliefs About Government.” Paper prepared for presentation at the Annual Meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association, Chicago, IL, April.
30.
Kaase, M. and K.Newton (1995). Beliefs in Government. New York: Oxford University Press.
31.
Kahneman, D. (1994). “New Challenges to the Rationality Assumption.”Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics—Zeitschrift Für die Gesamte Staatswissenschaft, 150: 18-36.
32.
Klingemann, H.D. (1999). “Mapping Political Support in the 1990s: A Global Analysis.” In Critical Citizens: Global Support for Democratic Government (P.Norris, ed.), 31-56. New York: Oxford University Press.
33.
Knight, J. (1992). Institutions and Social Conflict. New York: Cambridge University Press.
34.
Kornberg, A. and H.D. Clarke (1994). “Beliefs about Democracy and Satisfaction with Democratic Government: The Canadian Case.”Political Research Quarterly, 47: 537-563.
35.
Lambert, R.D. , J.E. Curtis, S.D. Brown, and B.J. Kay (1986). “Effects of Identification with Governing Parties on Feelings of Political Efficacy and Trust.”Canadian Journal of Political Science, 19: 705-728.
36.
Lane, R.E. (1959). Political Life. Why People Get Involved in Politics. New York: The Free Press.
37.
Lasswell, H. (1953). Politics: Who Gets What When and How. New York: McGraw-Hill.
38.
Lijphart, A. (1994). “Democracies: Forms, Performance, and Constitutional Engineering.”European Journal of Political Research, 25: 1-17.
39.
Lipset, S.M. (1959). Political Man: The Social Bases of Poltics. Garden City, NY: Doubleday.
40.
Lopez Pina, A. , P. McDonough, and S.H. Barnes (1994). “The Nature of Political Support and Legitimacy in Spain.”Comparative Political Studies, 27: 349-380.
41.
McGuire, W. J. (1968). “Theory and the Structure of Human Thought.” In Theories of Cognitive Consistency: A Sourcebook (R.P. Abelson, ed.), 140-162. Chicago: Rand McNally.
42.
Mishler, W. and R. Rose. (1997) “Trust, Distrust and Skepticism: Popular Evaluations of Civil and Political Institutions in Post-Communist Societies.”Journal of Politics, 59: 418-451.
43.
Nadeau, R. and A. Blais (1993). “Accepting the Election Outcome: The Effect of Participation on Losers' Consent.”British Journal of Political Science, 23: 553-563.
44.
Norris, P. (1999). “Institutional Explanations for Political Support.” In Critical Citizens: Global Support for Democratic Government (P. Norris, ed.), 217-235. New York: Oxford University Press.
45.
Powell, G. B. (1982). Contemporary Democracies: Participation, Stability and Violence. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
46.
Powell, G. B. (1986). “Extremist Parties and Political Turmoil: Two Puzzles.”American Journal of Political Science, 30: 357-378.
47.
Regan, D.T. and M. Kilduff (1988). “Optimism About Elections: Dissonance Reduction at the Ballot Box.”Political Psychology, 9: 101-107.
48.
Riker, W.H. (1965). Democracy in the United States (2nd ed.). New York: Macmillan.
49.
Riker W.H. (1982). Liberalism Against Populism: A Confrontation Between the Theory of Democracy and the Theory of Social Choice. San Francisco: W.H.Freeman.
50.
Riker, W.H. (1983). “Political Theory and the Art of Heresthetics.” In Political Science: The State of the Discipline (A.W. Finifter, ed.), 47-67. Washington: American Political Science Association.
51.
Rousseau, D.L. , C. Gelpi, D. Reiner, and P.H. Huth (1996). “Assessing the Dyadic Nature of the Democratic Peace, 1918-88.”American Political Science Review, 90: 512-533.
52.
Seligson, M.A. (1993). “Political Culture and Regime Type: Evidence from Nicaragua and Cost Rica.”Journal of Politics, 55: 777-792.
53.
Stricker, G. (1964). “The Operation of Cognitive Dissonance on Pre- and Post-Election Attitudes.”Journal of Social Psychology, 63: 111-119.
54.
Thaler, R. (1994). The Winner's Curse: Paradoxes and Anomalies of Economic Life. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
55.
Tversky, A. and D. Kahneman (1992). “Advances in Prospect Theory: Cumulative Representation of Uncertainty.”Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 5: 297-323.
56.
Vetter, A. (forthcoming). “Frischer Wind in einer alten Beziehung? Political Efficacy und die Bundestagswahlen 1998.” In Wirklich ein Volk? Die politischen Einstellungen von Ost- und Westdeutschen im Vergleich (J.W. Falter, O.W. Gabriel, and H.Rattinger, eds.). Opladen: Leske & Budrich.
57.
Whiteley, P.F. and P. Seyd (1998). “The Dynamics of Party Activism in Britain: A Spiral of Demobilization?”British Journal of Political Science, 28: 113-137.
