IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/eeupol/v20y2019i2p176-197.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Conditional legitimacy: How turnout, majority size, and outcome affect perceptions of legitimacy in European Union membership referendums

Author

Listed:
  • Sveinung Arnesen
  • Troy S Broderstad
  • Mikael P Johannesson
  • Jonas Linde

Abstract

This conjoint study investigates the type of mandate a referendum confers in the political decision-making process. While a majority of citizens in general believe that the government should follow the results of a referendum on European Union membership, its perceived legitimacy in the eyes of the public heavily depends upon the level of turnout, the size of the majority, and the outcome of the specific referendum in question. Thus, whether a referendum legitimizes a political decision in the eyes of the public is conditional upon these three dimensions.

Suggested Citation

  • Sveinung Arnesen & Troy S Broderstad & Mikael P Johannesson & Jonas Linde, 2019. "Conditional legitimacy: How turnout, majority size, and outcome affect perceptions of legitimacy in European Union membership referendums," European Union Politics, , vol. 20(2), pages 176-197, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:eeupol:v:20:y:2019:i:2:p:176-197
    DOI: 10.1177/1465116518820163
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1465116518820163
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/1465116518820163?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Eric S. Dickson & Sanford C. Gordon & Gregory A. Huber, 2015. "Institutional Sources of Legitimate Authority: An Experimental Investigation," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 59(1), pages 109-127, January.
    2. Lupia,Arthur & McCubbins,Mathew D., 1998. "The Democratic Dilemma," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521585934, Enero.
    3. Leemann, Lucas & Wasserfallen, Fabio, 2016. "The Democratic Effect of Direct Democracy," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 110(4), pages 750-762, November.
    4. Weatherford, M. Stephen, 1992. "Measuring Political Legitimacy," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 86(1), pages 149-166, March.
    5. Hainmueller, Jens & Hopkins, Daniel J. & Yamamoto, Teppei, 2014. "Causal Inference in Conjoint Analysis: Understanding Multidimensional Choices via Stated Preference Experiments," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 22(1), pages 1-30, January.
    6. Nicholas Carnes & Noam Lupu, 2015. "Rethinking the Comparative Perspective on Class and Representation: Evidence from Latin America," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 59(1), pages 1-18, January.
    7. Connor Huff & Joshua D. Kertzer, 2018. "How the Public Defines Terrorism," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 62(1), pages 55-71, January.
    8. L. Conradt & T. J. Roper, 2003. "Group decision-making in animals," Nature, Nature, vol. 421(6919), pages 155-158, January.
    9. Iain D. Couzin & Jens Krause & Nigel R. Franks & Simon A. Levin, 2005. "Effective leadership and decision-making in animal groups on the move," Nature, Nature, vol. 433(7025), pages 513-516, February.
    10. Bansak, Kirk & Hainmueller, Jens & Hopkins, Daniel J. & Yamamoto, Teppei, 2018. "The Number of Choice Tasks and Survey Satisficing in Conjoint Experiments," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 26(1), pages 112-119, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Dominik Schraff & Frank Schimmelfennig, 2020. "Does differentiated integration strengthen the democratic legitimacy of the EU? Evidence from the 2015 Danish opt-out referendum," European Union Politics, , vol. 21(4), pages 590-611, December.
    2. Yoichi Hizen, 2021. "A Referendum Experiment with Participation Quorums," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 74(1), pages 19-47, February.
    3. Nils D. Steiner & Claudia Landwehr & Philipp Harms, 2024. "False Consensus Beliefs and Populist Attitudes," Working Papers 2403, Gutenberg School of Management and Economics, Johannes Gutenberg-Universität Mainz.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Matthew Amengual & Rita Mota & Alexander Rustler, 2023. "The ‘Court of Public Opinion:’ Public Perceptions of Business Involvement in Human Rights Violations," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 185(1), pages 49-74, June.
    2. Henrik Serup Christensen & Lauri Rapeli, 2021. "Immediate rewards or delayed gratification? A conjoint survey experiment of the public’s policy preferences," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 54(1), pages 63-94, March.
    3. Tukiainen, Janne & Blesse, Sebastian & Bohne, Albrecht & Giuffrida, Leonardo M. & Jääskeläinen, Jan & Luukinen, Ari & Sieppi, Antti, 2024. "What are the priorities of bureaucrats? Evidence from conjoint experiments with procurement officials," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 227(C).
    4. Xiang, C. & van Gevelt, T., 2025. "China's global leadership aspirations and domestic support for climate policy," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 227(C).
    5. Christensen, Henrik Serup, 2019. "How citizens evaluate participatory processes: A conjoint analysis," SocArXiv 5t72a, Center for Open Science.
    6. Henrik S Christensen & Marco S La Rosa & Kimmo Grönlund, 2020. "How candidate characteristics affect favorability in European Parliament elections: Evidence from a conjoint experiment in Finland," European Union Politics, , vol. 21(3), pages 519-540, September.
    7. Lala Muradova & Ross James Gildea, 2021. "Oil wealth and US public support for war," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 38(1), pages 3-19, January.
    8. Barceló, Joan & Sheen, Greg Chih-Hsin & Tung, Hans H. & Wu, Wen-Chin, 2022. "Vaccine nationalism among the public: A cross-country experimental evidence of own-country bias towards COVID-19 vaccination," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 310(C).
    9. Thomas Bernauer & Steffen Mohrenberg & Vally Koubi, 2020. "Do citizens evaluate international cooperation based on information about procedural and outcome quality?," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 15(2), pages 505-529, April.
    10. Marie-Hélène Pillot & Jacques Gautrais & Patrick Arrufat & Iain D Couzin & Richard Bon & Jean-Louis Deneubourg, 2011. "Scalable Rules for Coherent Group Motion in a Gregarious Vertebrate," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(1), pages 1-8, January.
    11. Kawata, Keisuke & Nakabayashi, Masaki, 2023. "Persistent mind: The effects of information provision on policy preferences," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 45(3), pages 522-537.
    12. Anders Gustafsson, 2019. "Busy doing nothing: why politicians implement inefficient policies," Constitutional Political Economy, Springer, vol. 30(3), pages 282-299, September.
    13. Lisanne de Blok & Max Heermann & Julian Schuessler & Dirk Leuffen & Catherine E. de Vries, 2024. "All on board? The role of institutional design for public support for differentiated integration," European Union Politics, , vol. 25(3), pages 593-604, September.
    14. Simon Levin & Anastasios Xepapadeas, 2021. "On the Coevolution of Economic and Ecological Systems," Annual Review of Resource Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 13(1), pages 355-377, October.
    15. Chaikaew, Pasicha & Hodges, Alan W. & Grunwald, Sabine, 2017. "Estimating the value of ecosystem services in a mixed-use watershed: A choice experiment approach," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 23(C), pages 228-237.
    16. Aaron McCright, 2011. "Political orientation moderates Americans’ beliefs and concern about climate change," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 104(2), pages 243-253, January.
    17. Thompson, Paul N., 2019. "Are school officials held accountable for fiscal stress? Evidence from school district financial intervention systems," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 44-54.
    18. Gary Goertz & Tony Hak & Jan Dul, 2013. "Ceilings and Floors," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 42(1), pages 3-40, February.
    19. Abraham Aldama & Daniel Draganoff & Gantavya Pahwa, 2024. "An experiment in the role of identity in fostering coordination," Journal of the Economic Science Association, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 10(2), pages 294-309, December.
    20. David Altman, 2002. "Prospects for E-Government in Latin America: Satisfaction With Democracy, Social Accountability, and Direct Democracy," International Review of Public Administration, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 7(2), pages 5-20, December.

    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:sae:eeupol:v:20:y:2019:i:2:p:176-197. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.