MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W205835055 · doi:10.1093/0199240566.001.0001

Political Parties in Advanced Industrial Democracies

2002· book· en· W205835055 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPolitical Systems and Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPoliticsDemocracyCynicismPolitical scienceAnachronismCivil societyPolitical economySociologyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This book is one in a series (Comparative Politics) for students and teachers of political science that deals with contemporary issues in comparative government and politics. It examines political parties in contemporary democracies, asking how relevant and vital they are, whether they fulfill the functions that any stable and effective democracy might expect of them, or whether they are little more than moribund anachronisms, relics of a past age of political life, now superseded by other mechanisms of linkage between state and society. The book addresses these questions through a rigorous comparative analysis of political parties operating in the world's advanced industrial democracies. Drawing on the expertise of a team of internationally known specialists, the book engages systematically with the evidence to show that, while a degree of popular cynicism towards them is often chronic, though rarely acute, parties have adapted and survived as organizations, remodelling themselves to the needs of an era in which patterns of linkage and communication with social groups have been transformed. This has enabled them, on the one hand, to remain central to democratic systems, especially in respect of the political functions of governance, recruitment and, albeit more problematically, interest aggregation. On the other hand, the challenges they face in respect of interest articulation, communication, and participation have pushed parties into more marginal roles within Western political systems. The implications of these findings for democracy depend on the observer's normative and theoretical perspectives. Those who understand democracy primarily in terms of popular choice and control in public affairs will probably see parties as continuing to play a central role, while those who place greater store by the more demanding criteria of optimizing interests and instilling civic orientations among citizens are far more likely to be fundamentally critical. After an introductory chapter the book has 13 chapters devoted to case studies of political parties in different countries/regions (Britain, Italy, Germany, France, the Low Countries (Belgium and the Netherlands), Scandinavia (Finland, Denmark, Norway, Sweden), Ireland, Spain, Europe (parties at the European level), the United States, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand; these are followed by a concluding chapter.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0040.004
Scholarly communication0.0060.002
Open science0.0000.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.001

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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.242 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreOther

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations366
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPolitical Systems and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207