Political Behavior

, Volume 40, Issue 2, pp 415–433 | Cite as

Incognizance and Perceptual Deviation: Individual and Institutional Sources of Variation in Citizens’ Perceptions of Party Placements on the Left–Right Scale

  • John H. Aldrich
  • Gregory S. Schober
  • Sandra LeyEmail author
  • Marco Fernandez
Original Paper


In this paper we use comparative study of electoral systems data to understand the variation in citizens’ perceptions of political party placements on the left–right scale. We estimate multilevel models to assess the extent to which individual characteristics, party characteristics, and institutional designs contribute to variability observed in citizens’ perceptions of party placements. Because lack of information on the part of the citizens may be revealed through failure to respond to the left–right scale questions or through random components to actual placements, we develop models that include assessments of both types of responses to reduce bias from considering only one source. We find that individual-, party-, and institutional-level variables are relevant to understanding variation in citizens’ perceptions of party placements. Finally, we demonstrate that an inability to cognize the left–right scale (incognizance) and a deviation in the perceptions of party positions (perceptual deviation) have important consequences for citizens’ thermometer evaluations of political parties.


Political parties Party placement Ideology 

Supplementary material

11109_2017_9406_MOESM1_ESM.docx (72 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 72 kb)


  1. Abramson, P. R., Aldrich, J. H., Gomez, B. T., & Rohde, D. W. (2014). Change and continuity in the 2012 elections. Thousand Oaks, CA: CQ Press.Google Scholar
  2. Abramson, P. R., Aldrich, J. H., & Rohde, D. W. (2012). Change and continuity in the 2008 and 2010 elections. Washington, DC: CQ Press.Google Scholar
  3. Adams, J., Ezrow, L., & Somer-Topcu, Z. (2011). Is anybody listening? Evidence that voters do not respond to European parties’ policy statements during elections. American Journal of Political Science, 55(2), 370–382.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Aspelund, A., Lindeman, M., & Verkasalo, M. (2013). Political conservatism and left-right orientation in 28 Eastern and Western European countries. Political Psychology, 34(3), 409–417.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Beck, T., Clarke, G., Groff, A., Keefer, P., & Walsh, P. (2010). New tools in comparative political economy: The database of political institutions. World Bank Economic Review, 15(1), 165–176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Best, R. E., & McDonald, M. D. (2011). The role of party policy positions in the operation of democracy. In R. J. Dalton & C. J. Anderson (Eds.), Citizens, context, and choice: How context shapes citizens’ electoral choices (pp. 79–102). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  7. Butler, D., & Stokes, D. (1974). Political change in Britain: Basis of electoral choice. London: Palgrave Macmillan Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Campbell, A., Converse, P. E., Miller, W. E., & Stokes, D. E. (1960). The American voter. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  9. Coughlin, R. M., & Lockhart, C. (1998). Grid-group theory and political ideology: A consideration of their relative strengths and weaknesses for explaining the structure of mass belief systems. Journal of Theoretical Politics, 10(1), 33–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Dalton, R. J. (2011). Left-right orientations, context, and voting choices. In R. J. Dalton & C. Anderson (Eds.), Citizens, context, and choice: How context shapes citizens’ electoral choices. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  11. Downs, A. (1957). An economic theory of democracy. New York: Harper Collins.Google Scholar
  12. Duverger, M. (1963). Political Parties: Their organization and activity in the modern state (science ed.). New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  13. Fortunato, D., & Stevenson, R. T. (2013). Perceptions of partisan ideologies: The effect of coalition participation. American Journal of Political Science, 57(2), 459–477.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Fortunato, D., Stevenson, R. T., & Vonnahme, G. (2015). Context, heuristics, and political knowledge: Explaining cross-national variation in citizens’ left-right knowledge. Retrieved February 5, 2015 from,
  15. Gronke, P., & Brehm, J. (2002). History, heterogeneity, and presidential approval. Electoral Studies, 21, 425–452.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hinich, M., & Munger, M. (1994). Ideology and the theory of political choice. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hobolt, S., Tilley, J., & Banducci, S. (2013). Clarity of responsibility: How government cohesion conditions performance voting. European Journal of Political Research, 52(2), 164–187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Knight, K. (1985). Ideology in the 1980 election: Ideological sophistication does matter. The Journal of Politics, 47(3), 828–853.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Knutsen, O. (1995). Value orientation, political conflicts and left-right identification: A comparative study. European Journal of Political Research, 28(1), 63–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Mair, P., & Van Biezen, I. (2001). Party membership in twenty European democracies, 1980-2000. Party Politics, 7(1), 5–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Moreno, A. (1996). Expertos Y Público De Masas En La Interpretación De La Izquierda Y La Derecha. Este País, 69(December), 1–11.Google Scholar
  22. Potter, C. (2001). Left-right self-placement in Western Europ: What responses and non-responses indicate. Madison, WI: Political Behaviour Group.Google Scholar
  23. Rabe-Hesketh, S., & Skrondal, A. (2008). Multilevel and longitudinal modeling using stata. College Station: Stata Press.Google Scholar
  24. Sartori, G. (1976). Parties and party systems: A framework for analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  25. Somer-Topcu, Z. (2015). Everything to everyone: The electoral consequences of the broad-appeal strategy in Europe. American Journal of Political Science, 59(4), 841–854.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Thorisdottir, H., Jost, J. T., Liviatan, I., & Shrout, P. E. (2007). Psychological needs and values underlying left-right political orientation: Cross-national evidence from Eastern and Western Europe. Public Opinion Quarterly, 71(2), 175–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Tomz, M., & Van Houweling, R. P. (2009). The electoral implications of candidate ambiguity. American Political Science Review, 103(1), 83–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Van Biezen, I. (2003). Political parties in new democracies: Party organization in Southern and East-Central Europe. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. van der Brug, W. (1999). Voters’ perceptions and party dynamics. Party Politics, 5(2), 147–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Weber, W., & Saris, W. E. (2015). The relationship between issues and an individual’s left–right orientation. Acta Politica, 50(2), 193–213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Zechmeister, E. (2006). What’s left and who’s right? A Q-method study of individual and contextual influences on the meaning of ideological labels. Political Behavior, 28(2), 151–173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Zechmeister, E. (2015). Left-right identifications and the Latin American voter. In R. Carlin, M. Singer, & E. Zechmeister (Eds.), The Latin American voter. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Political ScienceDuke UniversityDurhamUSA
  2. 2.Department of Political ScienceUniversity of Texas at El PasoEl PasoUSA
  3. 3.Division of Political StudiesCIDEMexico CityMexico
  4. 4.School of GovernmentITESMMexico CityMexico

Personalised recommendations