We thank John Bullock, Jula Choucair-Visozo, Sarah Croco, Alexandre Debs, Brad Epperly, Donald Green, Susan Hyde, Pierre Landry, Ellen Lust, Kenneth Matis, Irfan Nooruddin, David Patel, Nicholas Sambanis, Kenneth Scheve, Jonah Schulhofer-Wohl, Susan Stokes, and participants at seminars at Yale University, the University of Maryland, Cornell University, and a panel at the 2010 Midwest Political Science Association annual meeting for comments on the project and survey design. We are grateful to Vinicius Lindoso and Baobao Zhang for capable research assistance. For their generous financial support, we thank the MacMillan Center and the Institution for Social and Policy Studies at Yale University, as well as the Center for International Development and Conflict Management, the Department of Government and Politics, and the Designated Research Initiative Fund at the University of Maryland. Replication materials are available at http://isps.research.yale.edu/research-2/data/D075.
Taking Sides in Other People’s Elections: The Polarizing Effect of Foreign Intervention
Article first published online: 21 FEB 2012
© 2012, Midwest Political Science Association
American Journal of Political Science
Volume 56, Issue 3, pages 655–670, July 2012
How to Cite
Corstange, D. and Marinov, N. (2012), Taking Sides in Other People’s Elections: The Polarizing Effect of Foreign Intervention. American Journal of Political Science, 56: 655–670. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-5907.2012.00583.x
- Issue published online: 16 JUL 2012
- Article first published online: 21 FEB 2012
What do voters think when outside powers become de facto participants in a country’s election? We conceptualize two types of foreign intervention: a partisan stance, where the outsider roots for a particular candidate slate, and a process stance, where outsiders support the democratic process. We theorize that a partisan outside message will polarize partisan actors domestically on the issue of appropriate relations with the outsiders: partisans who are supported will want closer relations with the outside power, and partisans who are opposed will favor more distant relations. A process message, in contrast, will have a moderating effect on voters’ attitudes. We present evidence of partisan polarization along those lines from a survey experiment we conducted in Lebanon in the wake of the 2009 parliamentary elections. We discuss the implications of our findings for future studies of how outsiders can encourage moderate electoral outcomes in democratizing states.