Partitocracy and intra-party ideological agreement
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
In this chapter we analyze the internal ideological homogeneity of Belgian parties and we compare it with that of parties in three other countries: Germany, Switzerland and Canada. None of these other countries is considered to be a partitocracy; the Swiss case is sometimes even described as the exact opposite, namely a system that does not entail party government and with relatively weak parties. We employ novel data drawn from a survey of 851 politicians-MPs, ministers and party leaders-in these four countries. Our questionnaire included eight (or nine in Switzerland) policy proposals that politicians were asked their personal opinion about. This allows to calculate ideological agreement on the country, party and individual level. Apart from using objective opinion ‘distance’ between a partisan and his/her party as a measure of ideological agreement, we also use questions in which politicians were asked to make a subjective estimation of how often they disagree with their party compared to their colleagues. We find that parties in all four countries are rather ideologically homogeneous. On average, individual politicians agree with their party’s stance (i.e. with the majority of MPs in their party) on four out of five policy proposals. There are only small differences between individual representatives but much larger differences across parties. In the four countries under study, government parties, left-wing parties and populist parties are more internally homogenous (they have less members who diverge from the party line on several policy proposals) than opposition, right-wing and non-populist parties. Further, we find that politicians diverge from their party especially with regard to issues on which they perceive their electorate to be at odds with what the party wants. Most importantly, the country in our sample with the weakest parties, Switzerland, also appears to have the least ideologically homogenous parties; many party representatives in Switzerland disagree with the majority of their partisan colleagues. Our partitocratic case of Belgium differs significantly from the Swiss by having more homogenous parties but Belgian parties are not more ideologically united than their German and Canadian counterparts.
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 enseignantsNi 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.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,006 | 0,017 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,004 | 0,004 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,002 | 0,003 |
| Communication savante | 0,003 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,010 | 0,001 |
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.
score_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 découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».