PropertyValue
?:abstract
  • Scholars of American politics have generally found a negative relationship between ambivalence and political engagement. This study explores such conclusions and argues that the effect of ambivalence on engagement varies according to electoral context. Using a multi-level modeling strategy, I find that ambivalence has a significant overall effect on political engagement for citizens in the United States but a lesser overall impact for citizens in Great Britain. Yet by allowing the slope and the intercept of ambivalence to vary across parliamentary districts, I find that ambivalence has asymmetrical effects on political engagement within Britain. I conclude by arguing that ambivalence essentially operates in a differential manner across electoral contexts and provide preliminary evidence as to why this is. (xsd:string)
?:author
?:comment
  • http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1467-9248.12063. (CSES) (xsd:string)
?:dataSource
  • CSES-Bibliography (xsd:string)
?:dateModified
  • 2013 (xsd:gyear)
?:datePublished
  • 2013 (xsd:gyear)
?:duplicate
is ?:hasPart of
?:isPartOf
is ?:mainEntity of
?:name
  • Ambivalence, political engagement and context (xsd:string)
?:publicationType
  • article (xsd:string)
?:sourceInfo
  • Bibsonomy (xsd:string)
  • In Political Studies, 2013 (xsd:string)
?:studyGroup
  • Comparative Study of Electoral Systems (CSES) (xsd:string)
?:tags
  • 2013 (xsd:string)
  • CSES (xsd:string)
  • CSES_input2014 (xsd:string)
  • CSES_pro (xsd:string)
  • FDZ_IUP (xsd:string)
  • SCOPUSindexed (xsd:string)
  • SSCIindexed (xsd:string)
  • ambivalence (xsd:string)
  • article (xsd:string)
  • checked (xsd:string)
  • comparative (xsd:string)
  • indexproved (xsd:string)
  • input2014 (xsd:string)
  • participation (xsd:string)
  • reviewed (xsd:string)
rdf:type
?:url