The criteria politciians use to evaluate public opinion
We study which public opinion signals politicians deem worthy of their attention and consideration when deciding how (not) to act. Concretely, we assess the relative importance of four criteria politicians may use when evaluating such signals, indicating either opinion quantity (i.e. whether the opinion is widely supported or deeply cared about) or quality (i.e. whether the opinion is well-informed or well-argued). Survey data from over 900 elected politicians across 11 countries reveal that politicians believe opinion quality should be prioritised above opinion quantity. This pattern, moreover, varies on several individual and party-level characteristics. As such, the results suggest that selective responsiveness observed in extant studies may stem from a mismatch in how responsiveness is typically measured (quantitatively) and how politicians think about it (qualitatively).
The findings are published in West European Politics.
Politicians' theories of voting behavior
While political scientists regularly engage in spirited theoretical debates about elections and voting behavior, few have noticed that elected politicians also have theories of elections and voting. Here, we investigate politicians’ positions on eight central theoretical debates in the area of elections and voting behavior and compare politicians’ theories to those held by ordinary citizens. Using data from face-to-face interviews with nearly one thousand politicians in 11 countries, together with corresponding surveys of more than twelve thousand citizens, we show that politicians overwhelmingly hold thin, minimalist, “democratic realist” theories of voting, while citizens’ theories are more optimistic and policy oriented. Politicians’ theoretical tendencies—along with their theoretical misalignment from citizens—are remarkably consistent across countries. These theories are likely to have important consequences for how politicians campaign, communicate with the public, think about public policy, and represent their constituents.
The paper detailing these findings is published in American Political Science Review
Public preferences for models of representation and MPs’ role orientations
How much autonomy elected representatives should have in serving their constituents remains a central question in democratic theory. While prior research has examined representatives’ role orientations, little is known about citizens’ preferences for delegate versus trustee models of representation and how these align with those of politicians. Using data from 13 countries, this study assesses the congruence between voters’ and MPs’ representational preferences. Across all cases, citizens who prefer delegate-style representation are poorly represented, as most MPs display moderate to strong trustee orientations. Subgroup analyses show that MPs from populist, radical left, or radical right parties, those in opposition, and those from lower social classes are somewhat more aligned with citizens’ preferences. Yet, even among these groups, delegate-style representatives are rare. For citizens, right-wing ideology is associated with greater trust in representatives’ autonomy, whereas support for populist parties decreases favorability toward trusteeship. Among MPs, ideological position, class, and government status do not significantly explain their representational preferences. This lack of variation highlights a widespread elite consensus in favor of trusteeship. Overall, the findings suggest that citizens’ desires for more delegate-style representation are largely unmet, potentially fueling political dissatisfaction.
This paper is pubslihed in the European Journal of Political Research
Other publications from this project
Lucas, Jack. 2024. “Are Municipal Politicians Ideological Moderates?” Cities 155 (12).
van de Wardt, M., Bundi, P., Loewen, P. J., Rasmussen, A., Sheffer, L., & Varone, F. (2025). Too honest and humble to run for office? Citizens’ personality traits, nascent ambition, and recruitment. European Journal of Political Research, 1-21.
Junius, N., & Walgrave, S. (2025). Are elected representatives’ intimate ties representative? Examining their socio-economic status in 13 countries. European Journal of Political Research, 1-23.
Junius, N., Soontjens, K., Kuraishi, A., Benoît Pilet, J., Taflaga, M., Werner, A., ... & Walgrave, S. (2025). Why top politicians are pessimistic or optimistic about democracy and its evolution. Democratization, 1-23.