MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Conditions of far-right strength in contemporary Western Europe: an application of Kitschelt's theory*

2005· article· en· W2127515694 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

VenueEuropean Journal of Political Research · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicElectoral Systems and Political Participation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQualitative comparative analysisRestructuringWelfare stateQualitative analysisConvergence (economics)Fuzzy logicSet (abstract data type)WelfareSpace (punctuation)Fuzzy setEconomicsSociologyPolitical scienceMathematicsComputer scienceEconomic growthQualitative researchSocial scienceLawPoliticsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Applying the demand-side claims of Kitschelt's theory, and the expectation that electoral systems affect voter choice, this article provides an explanation of cross-national variation in support for new radical right (NRR) parties between 1982 and 1995. After discussing concepts and measures, two versions of qualitative comparative analysis (Boolean analysis and fuzzy-set analysis) are applied to data for ten West European countries. The results suggest that, in combination with electoral systems that had larger district magnitudes, NRR strength resulted from a restructuring of the space of party competition due to post-industrialism and growth in the welfare state. Convergence between major parties of the left and right was not among the combination of conditions that led to NRR success. Apart from demonstrating that fuzzy-set analysis can yield a simpler explanation than Boolean analysis, this study reveals anomalous NRR outcomes for Austria, Belgium and France.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.925
Threshold uncertainty score0.296

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.171
GPT teacher head0.482
Teacher spread0.311 · 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