MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4200025292 · doi:10.1177/13540688211060652

Are they different? A comparative study of European populist party members

2021· article· en· W4200025292 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 · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPopulism, Right-Wing Movements
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPopulismPolitical economyPoliticsEuropean Social SurveyPolitical scienceDemocracySurvey data collectionTurnoutSociologyLawVoting

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Party membership is in decline across the established democracies, but populist parties appear to be reversing this trend. The expansion of populist parties’ membership base raises the question whether these parties are fulfilling their role as actors who serve as a “corrective to democracy” by mobilizing the socially and politically marginalized to become politically active. Using large comparative datasets from the European Social Survey and the World Values Survey, we examine the characteristics of populist party members in terms of their socio-demographic background and their political attitudes. We show that, with the exceptions of income levels and church attendance, the members of populist and non-populist parties look very much alike and hold similar political attitudes. These findings imply that mobilizing the politically disaffected remains a challenge, even for populist actors.

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.094
Threshold uncertainty score0.992

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.104
GPT teacher head0.364
Teacher spread0.260 · 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