Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer
SP baner

Vol. 47 No. 3 (2019)

Political attitudes

A Sense of Political Agency: About the Determinants and Correlates of the Phenomenon

DOI: https://doi.org/10.35757/STP.2019.47.3.01
Submitted: January 29, 2020
Published: September 27, 2019

Abstract

The article deals with the issue of a sense of political agency in the context of Polish local elections. It discusses the phenomenon itself and attempts to explain its determinants and relationships with electoral participation. The issue is studied in two institutional contexts: single-mandate constituencies and proportional representation constituencies.

References

  1. Anderson, Christopher J. and Christine 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.
  2. Banducci, Susan A., Todd Donovan, and Jeffrey A. Karp (1999). ‘Proportional representation and attitudes about politics: Evidence from New Zealand’, Electoral Studies 18: 533–555.
  3. Bandura, A. (1991). Social cognitive theory of self-regulation. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50: 248–287.
  4. Downs, Anthony (1957). An economic theory of democracy. New York: Harper and Row.
  5. Duverger, Maurice (1954). Political parties. New York: Wiley.
  6. Franklin, Charles H. and John E. Jackson (1983). ‘The dynamics of party identification’, American Political Science Review 77: 957–973.
  7. Franklin, Mark N. with Cees van der Eijk, Diana Evans, Michael Fotos, Wolfgang Hirczy de Mino, Michael Marsh and Bernard Wessels (2004). Voter turnout and the dynamics of electoral competition in established democracies since 1945. New York: Cambridge University Press.
  8. Franklin, Mark N. (1996). ‘Electoral participation’. In Laurence LeDuc, Richard G. Niemi, and Pippa Norris (eds). Comparing democracies: Elections and voting in global perspective. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage: 216–235.
  9. Jackman, Robert W. and Ross A. Miller (1995). ‘Voter turnout in the industrial democracies during the 1980s’, Comparative Political Studies 27: 467–492.
  10. Katz, Richard S. (1980). A theory of parties and electoral systems. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
  11. Ladner, Andrea and Henry Milner (1999). ‘Do voters turn out more under proportional than majoritarian systems? The evidence from Swiss communal elections’, Electoral Studies 18: 235–250.
  12. Leighley, Jan E. (1990) ‘Social interaction and contextual influences on political Participation’, American Politics Quarterly 18: 4: 459–475.
  13. Morrell, M.E. (2005). Deliberation, democratic decision-making and internal political efficacy. Political Behavior, 27: 49–69.
  14. Pingree, R.J. (2011). Effects of unresolved factual disputes in the news on epistemic political efficacy. Journal of Communication, 61, 22–47. doi:10.1111/jcom.2011.61.issue-1.
  15. Powell, G. Bingham Jr. (1986). ‘American voter turnout in comparative perspective’, American Political Science Review 80: 17–44.
  16. Pollock, III, P.H. (1983). The participatory consequences of internal and external political efficacy: A research note. The Western Political Quarterly, 400–409.
  17. Rubin, D. (2006). Matched Sampling for Causal Effects. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  18. Taagepera, Rein and Mathew Soberg Shugart (1989). Seats and votes. The effects and determinants of electoral systems. New Haven: Yale University Press.
  19. Verba, Sidney, Norman H. Nie, and Jae-On Kim (1978). Participation and political equality: A seven-nation comparison. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.