Citizens’ Preferences for Representation Styles: Exploring the Mandate–Independence Controversy in Eight European Countries

How do citizens want to be represented? What individual-level factors are associated with variation in these preferences? While existing research emphasises the crucial link between citizens and elected representatives, surprisingly little attention has been given to citizens’ expectations regarding how representation should be exercised. This article investigates citizens’ preferences in eight European countries for one central dimension of representation styles: the mandate–independence controversy. Relying on data from an original comparative survey conducted in 2025 (N ≈ 15,000), we analyse how individual-level factors—ranging from ideological outlook and cognitive mobilisation to electoral status and democratic satisfaction—correlate with citizens’ positioning on the trustee–delegate continuum. Our findings highlight the relevance of deep-rooted ideological orientations and the important role of contingent political dynamics and factors such as democratic satisfaction. Also, the study highlights the importance of national contexts and cautions against broad generalisations drawn from single-country analyses or pooled comparative findings alone. The article contributes to the literature by investigating the nature and origins of preferences towards representation styles, unsettling the conventional view that such preferences reflect principled commitments. Rather, it suggests they might often be evaluation-based, contingent, and far less normatively anchored than is usually assumed.