Department of Political Science

Multidimensional Representation

Research output: Contribution to journal/Conference contribution in journal/Contribution to newspaperJournal articleResearchpeer-review

Standard

Multidimensional Representation. / Wolkenstein, Fabio; Wratil, Christopher.

In: American Journal of Political Science, Vol. 65, No. 4, 10.2021, p. 862-876.

Research output: Contribution to journal/Conference contribution in journal/Contribution to newspaperJournal articleResearchpeer-review

Harvard

Wolkenstein, F & Wratil, C 2021, 'Multidimensional Representation', American Journal of Political Science, vol. 65, no. 4, pp. 862-876. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajps.12563

APA

Wolkenstein, F., & Wratil, C. (2021). Multidimensional Representation. American Journal of Political Science, 65(4), 862-876. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajps.12563

CBE

Wolkenstein F, Wratil C. 2021. Multidimensional Representation. American Journal of Political Science. 65(4):862-876. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajps.12563

MLA

Wolkenstein, Fabio and Christopher Wratil. "Multidimensional Representation". American Journal of Political Science. 2021, 65(4). 862-876. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajps.12563

Vancouver

Wolkenstein F, Wratil C. Multidimensional Representation. American Journal of Political Science. 2021 Oct;65(4):862-876. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajps.12563

Author

Wolkenstein, Fabio ; Wratil, Christopher. / Multidimensional Representation. In: American Journal of Political Science. 2021 ; Vol. 65, No. 4. pp. 862-876.

Bibtex

@article{597984a767d149388c5fcd55f55fdbc3,
title = "Multidimensional Representation",
abstract = "The study of representation is a major research field in quantitative political science. Since the early 2000s, it has been accompanied by a range of important conceptual innovations by political theorists working on the topic. Yet, although many quantitative scholars are familiar with the conceptual literature, even the most complex quantitative studies eschew engaging with the “new wave” of more sophisticated concepts of representation that theorists have developed. We discuss what we take to be the main reasons for this gap between theory and empirics, and present four novel conceptions of representation that are both sensitive to theorists{\textquoteright} conceptual impulses and operationalizable for quantitative scholars. In doing so, we advance an alternative research agenda on representation that moves significantly beyond the status quo of the field.",
keywords = "FIELD EXPERIMENT, LEGISLATORS, MEMBERS, POLITICAL REPRESENTATION, RESPONSIVENESS, TEXT",
author = "Fabio Wolkenstein and Christopher Wratil",
year = "2021",
month = oct,
doi = "10.1111/ajps.12563",
language = "English",
volume = "65",
pages = "862--876",
journal = "American Journal of Political Science",
issn = "0092-5853",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell Publishing, Inc.",
number = "4",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Multidimensional Representation

AU - Wolkenstein, Fabio

AU - Wratil, Christopher

PY - 2021/10

Y1 - 2021/10

N2 - The study of representation is a major research field in quantitative political science. Since the early 2000s, it has been accompanied by a range of important conceptual innovations by political theorists working on the topic. Yet, although many quantitative scholars are familiar with the conceptual literature, even the most complex quantitative studies eschew engaging with the “new wave” of more sophisticated concepts of representation that theorists have developed. We discuss what we take to be the main reasons for this gap between theory and empirics, and present four novel conceptions of representation that are both sensitive to theorists’ conceptual impulses and operationalizable for quantitative scholars. In doing so, we advance an alternative research agenda on representation that moves significantly beyond the status quo of the field.

AB - The study of representation is a major research field in quantitative political science. Since the early 2000s, it has been accompanied by a range of important conceptual innovations by political theorists working on the topic. Yet, although many quantitative scholars are familiar with the conceptual literature, even the most complex quantitative studies eschew engaging with the “new wave” of more sophisticated concepts of representation that theorists have developed. We discuss what we take to be the main reasons for this gap between theory and empirics, and present four novel conceptions of representation that are both sensitive to theorists’ conceptual impulses and operationalizable for quantitative scholars. In doing so, we advance an alternative research agenda on representation that moves significantly beyond the status quo of the field.

KW - FIELD EXPERIMENT

KW - LEGISLATORS

KW - MEMBERS

KW - POLITICAL REPRESENTATION

KW - RESPONSIVENESS

KW - TEXT

U2 - 10.1111/ajps.12563

DO - 10.1111/ajps.12563

M3 - Journal article

VL - 65

SP - 862

EP - 876

JO - American Journal of Political Science

JF - American Journal of Political Science

SN - 0092-5853

IS - 4

ER -