IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/socsci/v100y2019i6p1963-1983.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Representation Imperatives in the Public Mind

Author

Listed:
  • David Doherty
  • Amanda Clare Bryan
  • Reid Willis
  • Paul Witry

Abstract

Objective Some models of representation posit that high quality representation hinges on legislators adhering to their campaign promises. Others rest on the idea that representatives should respond to prevailing sentiment among their constituents. Still others suggest that legislators have a special obligation to their supporters—the voters who put them into office. We assess how important citizens think it is for elected officials to respond to each of these representation imperatives. Methods We leverage a national survey experiment that asked respondents to evaluate a Senator whose behavior conformed to or was at odds with each of these modes of representation. Findings Adhering to campaign promises and responding to prevailing public preferences similarly, and independently, affect evaluations of whether a vote cast by a legislator was appropriate. We also find a pronounced partisan divide in the importance people attach to responding to electoral supporters' preferences. Conclusions In the aggregate, Americans value each of the three modes of representation we investigate. However, Democrats attach essentially no independent importance to responsiveness to core supporters, while Republicans see this type of responsiveness as just as important as adhering to campaign promises or responding to the broader constituency.

Suggested Citation

  • David Doherty & Amanda Clare Bryan & Reid Willis & Paul Witry, 2019. "Representation Imperatives in the Public Mind," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 100(6), pages 1963-1983, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:socsci:v:100:y:2019:i:6:p:1963-1983
    DOI: 10.1111/ssqu.12686
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/ssqu.12686
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/ssqu.12686?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:socsci:v:100:y:2019:i:6:p:1963-1983. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0038-4941 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.