Skip to main content

Part of the book series: Europe in Crisis ((EIC))

  • 513 Accesses

Abstract

The three datasets used in this study are the British Election Study (BES 2017), 2017 French Election Study (FES 2017), and the German Longitudinal Election Study (2017, GLES pre- and post-election cross-section + CSES). This project benefited from the timing of the three major European elections taking place within such close proximity and the collaboration of research scholars through the project called the Comparative Study of Electoral Systems (CSES). The core objectives of the CSES aligned perfectly with the paper’s objectives in a number of regards, particularly regarding the measure of populism, nativism, and anti-immigrant sentiment. Models are built firstly to measure how populism, nativism, and economic risk predict anti-immigrant sentiment. We then model support for the extreme right using two separate logistic regressions. In the first case, we model right-wing voting from the populism, nativism, and economic variables, absent the anti-immigrant sentiment, and in the second set of models, anti-immigrant sentiment is included. We adopted this approach to examine the net effect of standard theories of support for right-wing parties while controlling for the dominant out-group sentiment present in all three election contexts.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 44.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 59.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Comparative Study of Electoral Systems. (2016). CSES Module 5: Democracy Divided? People, Politicians and the Politics of Populism. Last retrieved August 15, 2018, from http://www.cses.org/plancom/module5/CSES5_ContentSubcommittee_FinalReport.pdf.

  • Fieldhouse, E., Green, J., Evans, G., Schmitt, H., van der Eijk, C., Mellon, J., & Prosser, C. (2018, January). British Election Study, 2017: Face-to-Face Survey.

    Google Scholar 

  • Riker, W. (1982). The Two-Party System and Duverger’s Law: An Essay on the History of Political Science. The American Political Science Review, 76(4), 753–766.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roßteutscher, S., Schmitt-Beck, R., Schoen, H., Weßels, B., Wolf, C., Bieber, I., Stövsand, L.-C., Dietz, M., Scherer, P., Wagner, A., Melcher, R., & Giebler, H. (2018). Pre- and Post-election Cross Section (Cumulation) (GLES 2017). GESIS Data Archive, Cologne. ZA6802 Data file Version 1.1.0, https://doi.org/10.4232/1.12997.

  • Sauger, N. (2018). French Electoral Study 2017. Centre de données socio-politiques, Sciences Po/CNRS. Data file: fr.cdsp.ddi.FES2017.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Delton T. Daigle .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Daigle, D.T., Neulen, J., Hofeman, A. (2019). Methods. In: Populism, Nativism, and Economic Uncertainty. Europe in Crisis. Palgrave Pivot, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-02435-2_3

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics