Do impartial inquiries help voters hold the government accountable for political misconduct?
Jannik; id_orcid 0009-0002-1624-2461 Fenger
What the paper says
One major concern about democratic accountability is that partisanship constrains voters’ willingness to sanction incumbents for political misconduct. This study examines whether impartial inquiries help voters across party lines hold governments accountable for misconduct. In many parliamentary democracies, these check-and-balance institutions can be appointed as a response to political scandals, yet it remains unknown whether the findings of non-partisan investigations foster democratic accountability in the mass public. This article presents a rare panel analysis of how voters responded when an independent inquiry commission published a report with incriminating information about a government scandal in Denmark. With panel surveys collected just before and after this event, the results show that voters – especially government supporters – became more likely to perceptually acknowledge the misconduct and to sanction the incumbents. These findings suggest that impartial inquiries are valuable at persuading even in-party voters that officeholders are responsible for political misconduct.
Evidence weight
Balanced mode · F 0.40 / M 0.15 / V 0.05 / R 0.40
| F · citation impact | 0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20 |
| M · momentum | 0.50 × 0.15 = 0.07 |
| V · venue signal | 0.50 × 0.05 = 0.03 |
| R · text relevance † | 0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20 |
† Text relevance is estimated at 0.50 on the detail page — for your query’s actual relevance score, open this paper from a search result.