Dassonneville and Çakır's (2021) conclusion about polarization and turnout is that when polarization increases, centrist voters will be
[ Select ]
demobilized
mobilized
, while extreme voters will be
[ Select ]
demobilized
mobilized
by parties with extreme positions.

Question

Dassonneville and Çakır's (2021) conclusion about polarization and turnout is that when polarization increases, centrist voters will be 
[ Select ]
demobilized
mobilized
 , while extreme voters will be 
[ Select ]
demobilized
mobilized
 by parties with extreme positions.

BlackTom AI · Accepted Answer

The question presents two fill-in-the-blank statements about how polarization affects turnout, based on Dassonneville and Çakır's (2021) conclusion. We need to evaluate the two positions for each blank.

First blank analysis:
- If we consider the impact of increased polarization on centrist voters, the typical argument is that centrists, who occupy moderate positions, may feel alienated or disengaged as political centers fracture and party incentives push toward extremes. In many polarization studies, this leads to demobilization among centrist voters rather than mobilization. Therefore, the option that centrists will be demobilized when polarization increases aligns with a common interpretation of polarization’s effects on moderate, swing voters who might retreat from participation when politics becomes more ideologically extreme.
- The alternative—centrist voters mobilized as polarization grows—would require a rationale that polarization creates a rallying effect for moderates, which is less commonly argued in polarization literature. Thus mobilization of centrists is less consistent with the prevailing view described in many studies.

Second blank analysis:
- For extreme voters, the intuitive dynamic in highly polarized environments is that parties with extreme positions energize their base. Extreme voters are often highly motivated by salient ideological stakes and are more likely to turnout when parties signal strong, polarized choices. Consequently, extreme voters mobilized by extreme-positioned parties is a plausible and commonly observed mechanism in polarization effects on turnout.
- Conversely, extreme voters demobilized by extreme-positioned parties would imply that polarization suppresses turnout among the most ideologically extreme, which conflicts with the general idea that polarization intensifies passions and turnout incentives for those on the fringes. Hence demobilization of extreme voters is less consistent with the cited conclusion.

Putting it together:
- The paired answer we expect is: centrists demobilized and extreme voters mobilized by parties with extreme positions. This matches the widely discussed pattern where polarization depresses moderate turnout while intensifying partisan mobilization on the extremes.

Summary of correctness check:
- Option for first blank: demobilized is the more theoretically consistent choice, whereas mobilized would be counterintuitive given the typical polarization dynamics.
- Option for second blank: mobilized is the more consistent choice, while demobilized would imply a contrary effect not usually attributed to high polarization.

Note on missing options:
- The question provides no explicit list of alternative options to select from, only the intended correct pairing. Given that, the analysis favors the pair: demobilized (for centrists) and mobilized (for extremes), which matches the described conclusion about polarization’s differential effects on turnout by voter position.

2261 PS 1361 SEC1000 Week 9: Party System Polarization

Dassonneville and Çakır's (2021) conclusion about polarization and turnout is that when polarization increases, centrist voters will be [ Select ] demobilized mobilized , while extreme voters will be [ Select ] demobilized mobilized by parties with extreme positions.

查看解析

登录即可查看完整答案

类似问题

Which of the following best describes a challenge in cross-ideological dialogue that Mounk and Guzmán name?

Why do polarized societies create structural openings for authoritarian leaders?

Affective polarization refers to

Dassonneville and Çakır (2021) find a [choice] relationship between levels of polarization and the extent to which electorates are partisan. (hint: read p. 15)

The redistricting explanation argues that constituencies are increasingly becoming politically [ Select ] homogeneous heterogeneous . The sorting argument thinks that they are increaingly becoming politically [ Select ] homogeneous heterogeneous .

Political parties play a role in increasing polarization through:

In a consumer society, many adults channel creativity into buying things

Economic stress and unpredictable times have resulted in a booming industry for self-help products

更多留学生实用工具

考试浏览器助手

风格化写作助手

论文查重助手

文献引用助手

课堂转译助手

课堂笔记助手

Quiz搜索助手

学校历年真题

智能刷题助手

智能匹配练习

希望你的学习变得更简单