Federal Constitutional Values and Citizen Attitudes to Government: Explaining Federal System Viability and Reform Preferences in Eight Countries
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This study presents a measure of federal constitutional values as a dimension of federal political culture derived from four key features of federal systems. Tested in six federal and two non-federal countries, we find the measure is stable and taps enduring values, including confirmation that citizens who support devolutionary reform have stronger federal constitutional values. Defining federalism success as a system where citizens have strong federal constitutional values and high satisfaction with their current polycentric system, our results find Switzerland and Canada being the most viable, followed by the United States, Australia, and Germany, while Belgium is not very successful. In the non-federal countries, substantial support for devolution and possibly federalism is found in France, but devolution is more contested in the United Kingdom. The results affirm the importance of public attitudes and political culture in understanding the performance of federal political systems and public support for federalist-type reforms.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it