Abstract
The concept of party identification has been a matter of dispute ever since it was first introduced by a team of US scholars based at the University of Michigan in the 1950s (Belknap and Campbell 1952; Campbell et al. 1954, 1960).1 These debates are wide-ranging but essentially boil down to four major issues. The first relates to the nature of party identification: what is this concept exactly? The second concerns the sources of party identification and its stability: how does it develop? The third is strongly related to both these issues: how should party identification be measured? The fourth and final question relates to applicability of the concept outside the United States: is it useful in parliamentary systems, such as those of Western Europe, or only relevant in the country in which it was developed?
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Title of host publication | Political Parties and Partisanship. Social identity and individual attitudes |
| Editors | John Bartle, Paolo Bellucci |
| Place of Publication | London |
| Publisher | Routledge |
| Pages | 42-59 |
| Number of pages | 233 |
| ISBN (Electronic) | 978-0-203-88445-4 |
| ISBN (Print) | 978-0-415-46096-5 |
| Publication status | Published - 2009 |
Publication series
| Name | ECPR Studies in European Political Science |
|---|---|
| Publisher | Routledge |
| Number | 57 |
Keywords
- 2023 OA procedure
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'Party identification revisited'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Research output
- 1 Paper
-
Party identification revisited
Thomassen, J. & Rosema, M., 2009. 34 p.Research output: Contribution to conference › Paper › peer-review
Open AccessFile
Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver