ScholarGate
Assistent

Jämför metoder

Granska de valda metoderna sida vid sida; rader som skiljer sig är markerade.

Political Cleavage Analysis×Electoral System Analysis×
ÄmnesområdePolitical EconomyPolitical Economy
FamiljProcess / pipelineProcess / pipeline
Ursprungsår19671954
UpphovspersonSeymour Martin Lipset & Stein RokkanMaurice Duverger; Arend Lijphart; Rein Taagepera & Matthew Shugart
TypHistorical-comparative frameworkComparative institutional analysis framework
UrsprungskällaLipset, S. M., & Rokkan, S. (1967). Cleavage Structures, Party Systems, and Voter Alignments: An Introduction. In S. M. Lipset & S. Rokkan (Eds.), Party Systems and Voter Alignments. Free Press. ISBN: 9780029191507Duverger, M. (1954). Political Parties: Their Organization and Activity in the Modern State. Wiley. ISBN: 9780416683202
AliasLipset-Rokkan Model, Cleavage Structure Analysis, Social Cleavage Theory, Cleavage Politics FrameworkElectoral Systems Analysis, Analysis of Electoral Rules, Votes-to-Seats Analysis
Närliggande33
SammanfattningPolitical cleavage analysis explains the structure of party systems by reference to durable social divisions, following Seymour Martin Lipset and Stein Rokkan's 1967 account of cleavage structures, party systems, and voter alignments. Their argument is that the national and industrial revolutions produced four enduring cleavages — center versus periphery, state versus church, land versus industry, and owner versus worker — and that these divisions, frozen into party systems by the time of mass enfranchisement, continued to organize voter alignments long afterward. A full cleavage, as later refined by Bartolini and Mair, requires more than a social division: it needs a collective identity and an organizational expression that translate the division into politics.Electoral system analysis examines how the rules for translating votes into seats shape the proportionality of representation and the format of the party system. Maurice Duverger's 1954 work established the foundational propositions — that single-member plurality tends toward two-party competition while proportional representation favors multipartism — through the joint operation of a mechanical effect (how the seat-allocation rule itself distorts the vote) and a psychological effect (how voters and elites anticipate that rule and behave strategically). Rein Taagepera and Matthew Shugart (1989) put the field on a quantitative footing by showing how district magnitude and other parameters systematically determine outcomes, and Arend Lijphart (1994) provided the major comparative study of disproportionality and party systems across democracies. The method reads electoral rules as a powerful, designed lever over the structure of political competition.
ScholarGateDatamängd
  1. v1
  2. 2 Källor
  3. PUBLISHED
  1. v1
  2. 3 Källor
  3. PUBLISHED

Gå till sökningen Ladda ner bildspel

ScholarGateJämför metoder: Political Cleavage Analysis · Electoral System Analysis. Hämtad 2026-06-25 från https://scholargate.app/sv/compare