MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4379413550 · doi:10.1353/see.2019.0032

Parliamentary Elections in Russia: A Quarter-Century of Multiparty Politics by Derek S. Hutcheson (review)

2019· article· en· W4379413550 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ben Noble

Notice bibliographique

RevueThe Slavonic and East European Review · 2019
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineSocial Sciences
ThématiqueEastern European Communism and Reforms
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésPoliticsScholarshipState (computer science)Political scienceHistoriographyQuarter (Canadian coin)Period (music)ClassicsEconomic historyLawHistoryPolitical economySociology

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

REVIEWS 791 However, due to the prominence of the global history perspective, a more detailed engagement was needed with that historical trend. A more elaborate historiographical response — maybe in a concluding chapter — would have helped the reader situate the volume more accurately in the emerging scholarship on 1968. Trinity College Dublin Balázs Apor Hutcheson, Derek S. Parliamentary Elections in Russia: A Quarter-Century of Multiparty Politics. British Academy Monographs. The British Academy and Oxford University Press, London, Oxford and New York, 2018. xix + 326 pp. Tables. Notes. Appendix. Bibliography. Table of laws and decrees. Index. £65.00. How have Russian State Duma elections varied between 1993 and 2016? In this book, Derek S. Hutcheson — a leading scholar on Russian elections — provides a meticulous analysis of the shifting electoral landscape in post-Soviet Russia. The book contains nine chapters. Following an introductory chapter and an overview chapter (that surveys the broad changes in electoral politics from the late Soviet period to the seventh State Duma election, including discussions of key actors in the party system and the shifting role of the State Duma), the third chapter discusses the Russian electoral system, including the frequent reforms to it. The fourth chapter then looks at the party system, charting the transition from the ‘floating’ party system of the 1990s to the ‘cartel’ party system emergent from the early- to mid-2000s. Chapter five examines how political marketing has evolved, as well as how media coverage of party campaigns has varied both by party and over time. The sixth chapter turns to voter mobilization, including discussions of the use of ‘administrative resources’, turnout patterns and motivations for (non-)voting. The seventh chapter looks in more detail at voting behaviour, including analysing voting variation across Russian regions and discussing party identification, as well as the reasons for electoral discontent. The final substantive chapter discusses the question of electoral legitimacy, evaluating both evidence of electoral subversion and perceptions of legitimacy in the eyes of both Russian voters and international observers. The key attractions of the book are its sustained diachronic analysis of the full set of State Duma elections; its discussion of discrete stages of elections, from electoral laws to behaviour at the ballot box; and the impressive level of detail provided. By giving a long-term view of federal-level legislative elections, Hutcheson underscores the point that the State Duma’s current status as ‘a SEER, 97, 4, OCTOBER 2019 792 compliant part of the political “machine”’ (p. 5) is ‘not by chance’ (p. 3) — rather, a ‘considerable degree of institutional engineering […] has gone into creating’ this state of affairs (p. 5). In other words, ‘the constitutional structure of Russia does not necessarily lead to domination of the legislature by the president’ (p. 75). The text is peppered with fascinating details, including the reason why United Russia’s symbol is a bear (p. 30) and an account of farcically frequent party switching by one State Duma deputy (pp. 94–96). There are even some surprisingmomentsofhumour,suchasthedescriptionofthetimewhenformer Central Electoral Commission chairman Vladimir Churov landed in a pond in 2012 (p. 68), and the footnote on Ivan Rybkin’s mysterious disappearance during the 2004 presidential election campaign (p. 29). The use of the word ‘election’ in modern-day Russia is often modified by adjectives such as ‘fake’, ‘rigged’, ‘manipulated’ and ‘falsified’. One distinctive feature of Hutcheson’s analysis is that ‘it does not take as its starting point the automaticassumptionthattheRussianFederationisanunequivocally“electoral authoritarian” regime’ (p. 3). One advantage of taking this approach is that Hutcheson can do justice to the variation in the level of Kremlin control over elections in the post-Soviet period; there is not one simple characterization that can capture the federal executive’s stance towards, and fortunes in, State Duma elections. Another advantage is that, by adopting this starting point — that ‘real elections take place within the rules of the game’ (p. 56) — Hutcheson remains sensitive to the ways (beyond unfair manipulation of electoral procedures and illegal falsification) by which the authorities have been able to secure victories since 2003, such as through adopting modern political marketing techniques to appeal to as many voters as possible. The recipe for success in electoral authoritarian...

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Synthèse · Signal consensuel: Synthèse
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,005
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,014

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,004
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,001
Bibliométrie0,0020,004
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,001
Communication savante0,0020,002
Science ouverte0,0010,001
Intégrité de la recherche0,0010,003
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0040,002

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,011
Tête enseignante GPT0,259
Écart entre enseignants0,248 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreSynthèse

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2019
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueThe Slavonic and East European ReviewMême sujetEastern European Communism and ReformsTravaux en français237 207