MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2028561644 · doi:10.1177/1354068814549341

Which matters more in the electoral success of Islamist (successor) parties – religion or performance? The Turkish case

2014· article· en· W2028561644 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueParty Politics · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTurkey's Politics and Society
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTurkishPolitical scienceReligiositySuccessor cardinalDemocracyPoliticsPopularityPolitical economySingle non-transferable votePreferenceSociologyLawEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Does the electoral success of Islamist parties depend on the support of religious voters or does it owe as much or more to their performance in dealing with key political and economic issues? The repeated electoral success of an Islamist-rooted party, the Justice and Development Party (AKP) of Turkey, provides an important opportunity to answer this question. Using a nation-wide survey conducted in 2011 in Turkey, our findings suggest that in addition to religiosity the party’s performance with respect to social services, the economy and democracy were determining factors in the AKP’s success. We also found that the popularity of political leaders has an independent effect on party preference. We discuss similar tendencies in the aftermath of the Arab Spring elections where the Islamist parties emerged as the major winners.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.573
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.023
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.288 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it