The Dimensions of Partisanship in Canada

Authors

  • Eric M. Uslaner

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.15763/issn.2374-7781.1992.13.0.445-463

Abstract

Canadians are said to have weaker partisanship than Americans. Most particularly, many Canadians identify with different parties at the federal and provincial level. To what extent does this dual identification form part of a syndrome of weak partisanship, as institutionalist theories of Canadian partisanship would suggest? LISREL modeling of attitudes toward parties in the 1974-1979 panel of the Canadian National Election Studies finds little support for such an institutionalist view. Instead, Canadians have complex schemata for evaluating parties. Dual identification forms a distinct dimension. There are four other factors: temporal stability for both party identification and voting behavior, the strength of identification at both the federal and provincial levels, and separate dimensions for federal and provincial partisanship. These results provide support for a cultural/historical account, especially given the distinctiveness of schemata for Quebec and British Columbia.

References

Blake, Donald E. 1982. The Consistency of Inconsistency: Party Identification in Federal and Provincial Politics. Canadian Journal of Political Science 15: 691-710.

Blake, Donald E. with David J. Elkins and Richard Johnston. 1985. Two Political Worlds: Parties and Voting in British Columbia. Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press.

Bowler, Shaun. 1990. Consistency and Inconsistency in Canadian Party Identifications: Towards an Institutional Approach. Electoral Studies 9: 133-145.

Budge, Ian, Ivor Crewe, and Dennis Farlie, eds. 1976. Party Identification and Beyond. London: John Wiley.

Cairns, Alan C. 1968. The Electoral System and the Party System in Canada. Canadian Journal of Political Science 1: 55-80.

Campbell, Angus, Phillip E. Converse, Warren E. Miller, and Donald E. Stokes. 1960. The American Voter. New York: John Wiley.

Clarke, Harold D. and Marianne Stewart. 1987. Partisan Inconsistency and Partisan

Change in Federal States: The Case of Canada. American Journal of Political Science 31: 383-407.

Dennis, Jack. 1988. Political Independence in America, Partll: Towards a Theory. British Journal of Political Science 18: 197-219.

Elkins, David J. 1978. Party Identification: A Conceptual Analysis. Canadian Journal of Political Science 11:419-435. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0008423900041160

Fiorina, Morris P. 1981. Retrospective Voting in American National Elections. New Haven: Yale University Press.

Jacobson, Gary C. and Samuel Kemell. 1981. Strategy and Choice in Congressional Elections. New Haven: Yale University Press.

Jenson, Jane. 1975. Party Loyalty in Canada: The Question of Identification. Canadian Journal of Political Science 8: 543-553.

Johnston, Richard. 1985. Federal and Provincial Voting: Contemporary Patterns and Historical Evolution. In David J. Elkins and Richard Simeon, eds., Small Worlds: Provinces and Parties in Canadian Political Life. Toronto: Methuen.

Joreskog, Karl G. and Dag Sorbom. 1984. LISREL VI: Analysis of Linear Structural Relatinoships by the Method of Maximum Likelihood, third ed. Mooresville: Scientific Software.

LeDuc, Lawrence. 1984a. Canada: The Politics of Stable Dealignment. In Russell J. Dalton, Scott C. Flanagan, and Paul Allen Beck, eds., Electoral Change in Advanced Industrial Democracies. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

_______. 1984b. The Dynamic Properties of Party Identification: A Four-Nation Comparison. In Richard G. Niemi and Herbert F. Weisberg, eds., Controversies in Voting Behavior. Washington: CQ Press.

LeDuc, Lawrence, Harold D. Clarke, Jane Jenson, and Jon H. Pammett. 1984. Partisan Instability in Canada: Evidence from a New Panel Study. American Political Science Review 78: 470-484.

Lodge, Milton G. and Ruth Hamill. 1986. A Partisan Scheme for Political Information Processing. American Political Science Review 80: 505-519.

Martinez, Michael D. 1990. Partisan Reinforcement in Context and Cognition: Canadian Federal Partisanships, 1974-79. American Journal ofPolitical Science 34: 822- 845.

Miller, Arthur H., Martin P. Wattenberg, and Oksana Malanchuk. 1986. Schematic Assessments of Presidential Candidates. American Political Science Review 80: 521-540.

Niemi, Richard G., Richard S. Katz, and David Newman. 1980. Reconstructing Past Partisanship: The Failure of Party Identification Recall Questions. American Journal of Political Science 24: 633-651.

Schwartz, Mildred. 1967. Public Opinion and Canadian Identity. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Smith, David E. 1975. Prairie Liberalism: The Liberal Party in Saskatchewan. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.

_______. 1981. The Regional Decline of a National Party: Liberals on the Prairies. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.

Sniderman, Paul M., H.D. Forbes, and Ian Melzer. 1974. Party Loyalty and Electoral Volatility: A Study of the Canadian Party System. Canadian J our nal of Political Science 7: 268-288.

Sullivan, John L. and Stanley Feldman. 1979. Multiple Indicators. Beverly Hills: Sage.

Uslaner, Eric M. 1989. Multiple Party Identifiers in Canada: Participation and Affect. Journal of Politics 51: 993-1003.

_______. 1990. Splitting Image: Partisan Affiliations in Canada's Two Political Worlds. American Journal of Political Science 34: 961-981.

Valentine, David C. and John R. Van Wingen. 1980. Partisanship, Independence, and the Partisan Identification Question. American Politics Quarterly 8: 165-186.

Wattenberg, Martin P. 1982. Party Identification and Party Image: A Comparison of Britain, Canada, Australia, and the United States. Comparative Politics 15: 23- 40.

Wekkin, Gary D. 1991. Why Crossover Voters Are Not Mischievous Voters. American Politics Quarterly 19: 229-247.

Whitaker, Reginald. 1985. Party and State in the Liberal Era. In Hugh G. Thorbum, ed., Party Politics in Canada, fifth ed. Scarborough, Ontario: Prentice-Hall.

Williams, Robert J. 1985. Ontario's Political Systems: Federal and Provincial. In Hugh G. Thorbum, ed., Party Politics in Canada, fifth ed. Scarborough, Ontario: Prentice-Hall.

Zeller, Richard A. and Edward G. Carmines. 1980. Measurement in the Social Sciences. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Downloads

Published

1993-01-01

Issue

Vol. 13: Winter 1992

Section

Articles

License

Authors who publish with American Review of Politics agree to the following terms:

  1. The Author retains copyright in the Work, where the term “Work” shall include all digital objects that may result in subsequent electronic publication or distribution.

  2. Upon acceptance of the Work, the author shall grant to the Publisher the right of first publication of the Work.

  3. The Author shall grant to the Publisher and its agents the nonexclusive perpetual right and license to publish, archive, and make accessible the Work in whole or in part in all forms of media now or hereafter known under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 License or its equivalent, which, for the avoidance of doubt, allows others to copy, distribute, and transmit the Work under the following conditions:

    1. Attribution: other users must attribute the Work in the manner specified by the author as indicated on the journal Web site;

    2. Non-Commercial: the materials may not be used for commercial purposes;

    3. Share Alike: If you remix, transform, or build upon the material, you must distribute your contributions under the same license as the original.

with the understanding that the above condition can be waived with permission from the Author and that where the Work or any of its elements is in the public domain under applicable law, that status is in no way affected by the license.

  1. The Author is able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the nonexclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the Work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), as long as there is provided in the document an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.

  2. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post online a pre-publication manuscript (but not the Publisher’s final formatted PDF version of the Work) in institutional repositories or on their Websites prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (see The Effect of Open Access). Any such posting made before acceptance and publication of the Work shall be updated upon publication to include a reference to the Publisher-assigned DOI (Digital Object Identifier) and a link to the online abstract for the final published Work in the Journal.

  3. Upon Publisher’s request, the Author agrees to furnish promptly to Publisher, at the Author’s own expense, written evidence of the permissions, licenses, and consents for use of third-party material included within the Work, except as determined by Publisher to be covered by the principles of Fair Use.

  1. The Author represents and warrants that:

    1. the Work is the Author’s original work;

    2. the Author has not transferred, and will not transfer, exclusive rights in the Work to any third party;

    3. the Work is not pending review or under consideration by another publisher;

    4. the Work has not previously been published;

    5. the Work contains no misrepresentation or infringement of the Work or property of other authors or third parties; and

    6. the Work contains no libel, invasion of privacy, or other unlawful matter.

  2. The Author agrees to indemnify and hold Publisher harmless from Author’s breach of the representations and warranties contained in Paragraph 6 above, as well as any claim or proceeding relating to Publisher’s use and publication of any content contained in the Work, including third-party content.