Suspicious minds: Unexpected election outcomes, perceived electoral integrity and satisfaction with democracy in American presidential elections (Record no. 525411)
[ view plain ]
| 000 -LEADER | |
|---|---|
| fixed length control field | 01958nam a22001457a 4500 |
| 008 - FIXED-LENGTH DATA ELEMENTS--GENERAL INFORMATION | |
| fixed length control field | 240301b ||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d |
| 100 ## - MAIN ENTRY--PERSONAL NAME | |
| Personal name | Mongrain, Philippe |
| 245 ## - TITLE STATEMENT | |
| Title | Suspicious minds: Unexpected election outcomes, perceived electoral integrity and satisfaction with democracy in American presidential elections |
| 260 ## - PUBLICATION, DISTRIBUTION, ETC. (IMPRINT) | |
| Place of publication, distribution, etc | Political Research Quarterly |
| 300 ## - PHYSICAL DESCRIPTION | |
| Extent | 76(4), Dec, 2023: p. 1589-1603 |
| 520 ## - SUMMARY, ETC. | |
| Summary, etc | A great amount of research has noted the existence of a gap between election winners and losers in relation to perceptions of electoral fairness and satisfaction with democracy. One aspect of the winner–loser gap that has been overlooked is the impact of citizens’ expectations about election outcomes on these attitudes. More precisely, how do citizens react to unexpected defeats and victories? Are individuals on the losing side less critical of the electoral process or dissatisfied with democracy when they recognize beforehand that their favourite party or candidate was likely to be defeated? Does experiencing a surprise victory lead to a boost in perceived electoral integrity or democratic satisfaction? To answer these questions, I use data from the 1996, 2000, 2004, 2012, 2016 and 2020 ANES. While there is little evidence that expectations exert a major influence on post-election attitudes, outcome unexpectedness seems to have decreased confidence in the vote counting process among losers, independents and even winners in the 2020 election. The results show the considerable influence that fraud claims and conspiracy theories can have on public opinion when elected officials and candidates push a consistent story line of electoral malfeasance and corruption in an effort to denigrate political opponents.- Reproduced https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/10659129231166679 |
| 773 ## - HOST ITEM ENTRY | |
| Main entry heading | Political Research Quarterly |
| 906 ## - LOCAL DATA ELEMENT F, LDF (RLIN) | |
| Subject DIP | POLITICS AND GOVERNMENT – UNITED STATES |
| 942 ## - ADDED ENTRY ELEMENTS (KOHA) | |
| Item type | Articles |
| Withdrawn status | Lost status | Source of classification or shelving scheme | Damaged status | Not for loan | Permanent location | Current location | Date acquired | Serial Enumeration / chronology | Barcode | Date last seen | Koha item type |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Indian Institute of Public Administration | Indian Institute of Public Administration | 2024-03-01 | 76(4), Dec, 2023: p. 1589-1603 | AR131208 | 2024-03-01 | Articles |