arbiter
JournalsAccount

Policy-specific information and voter competence in direct democracy: Panel evidence from Danish EU referendums

Jannik Fenger

European Journal of Political Research2026https://doi.org/10.1017/s1475676526100826article
ABDC A
Weight
0.37

Abstract

For many years, political scientists have debated over voter competence in direct democracy. At the core of the discussion is whether this central institution enlightens citizens about political facts. However, scholars have primarily examined if direct democracy fosters general political knowledge even though referendums and ballot initiatives are policy-specific in nature, as citizens vote on particular political proposals. By utilising a range of unique panel survey data collected around four Danish European Union referendums, I show that voters’ knowledge of policy-specific information markedly increased during the campaigns. I also combine the survey data with an original media content analysis and find that the learning of issue-specific facts is more related to the opportunities provided by the media information environment than to individual ability or motivation. These results suggest that a broad group of voters acquire policy-specific facts that help them make informed choices when they are granted full control of political decision-making.

1 citation

Open via your library →

Cite this paper

https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1017/s1475676526100826

Or copy a formatted citation

@article{jannik2026,
  title        = {{Policy-specific information and voter competence in direct democracy: Panel evidence from Danish EU referendums}},
  author       = {Jannik Fenger},
  journal      = {European Journal of Political Research},
  year         = {2026},
  doi          = {https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1017/s1475676526100826},
}

Paste directly into BibTeX, Zotero, or your reference manager.

Flag this paper

Policy-specific information and voter competence in direct democracy: Panel evidence from Danish EU referendums

Flags are reviewed by the Arbiter methodology team within 5 business days.

Evidence weight

0.37

Balanced mode · F 0.40 / M 0.15 / V 0.05 / R 0.40

F · citation impact0.16 × 0.4 = 0.06
M · momentum0.53 × 0.15 = 0.08
V · venue signal0.50 × 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.