Understanding the Concept of Political Behaviour

Abstract

Political behaviour encompasses a combination of democratic attitudes and orientations that

shows people as an essential part of a democratic development in the society. Political behavior
literatures that exist are narrow and rely mostly on the traditionally drives and impulses to the
analysis of political behavior such as socio-cultural cleavages determined lines. However, this
study presents an academically comprehensive, and empirically well-explanation of the concept
of political behavior. Significant for its practical understanding and adoption in political behavior
discourse and analysis that is base on the most pressing issues and demands of the people. The
study uses a qualitative method of data collection. Findings revealed that political behavior
component include formal political participation and extra parliamentary activism. Formal
political participation: involves citizens to take part in voting, enjoys right to contest in any
office or position at the state or national levels, membership in political parties, pressure groups,
civil societies, labour unions, market unions, and humanitarian advocacy groups. And extra
parliamentary activism : involves protests or unconventional political engagement such as strike,
demonstrations, petitions, or rallies, in order to attract attention and concerns to portray the
electorates’ most pressing demands and needs towards government policies for the benefit of the
general public.

Keywords: Political Behaviour; Formal Political Participation; Extra Parliamentary Activism.

Introduction

Political behaviour is a highly contested notion; it describes people’s actions and inactions,
opinions, and interest in the political process that establishes links between the public and
political leaders. This is evident in activities such as voting, aspiring for political offices,
petitions, protests, forming political parties, spending time or money on political campaigns,
choices around which aspirants or political parties to vote for during elections, and choices
concerning positions to take, how to participate in politics to communicate views to
policymakers in order to influence policy decisions.1 Political behaviour is one of the significant
contributions of electorates to democracies and other political structures in making choices and
resolutions about political issues. In some political organisations, the choices are divergent;
however, the obligation of making a choice remains. Electorates make choices when political

1
Katsourides, Y. (2013). ‘Couch Activism ‘and the Individualisation of Political Demands: Political Behaviour in Contemporary Cypriot
Society. Journal of Contemporary European Studies, 21(1), 87-103. Kitchelt, H. & Rehm, P. (2011) Political participation, in: D. Caramani (Ed.),
2nd ed., pp. 331–351 (New York: Oxford University Press).
matters are conveyed to them, be it in a dictatorship or democracy. Particularly in democracies,
the electorates’ political behaviour remains fundamental to a political process. 2

It is significant to discuss the theoretical explanation of the concept of political behaviour and its
adoption in practical social science such as the study of changing political behavior. The
recognition of individual’s role by the behavioural theory to the study of politics sets the stage
for the incorporation of people’s behaviours towards their political system. This behaviour
becomes central to the analysis of political system instead of reliance on institutional
comparisons only. This for years served as a reference point for the explanation of the origin,
scope, and function of political behaviour in the study of political system. This development,
according to the behavioural theory, not only brought the need for the first time the use of survey
research method in the study of political behaviour but an avenue to use those techniques in a
cross-national context and comparative studies. This in general introduced a new method in the
study of political science.3

Methodology
This study adopted a qualitative means in its data collection and analysis. Qualitative method
allows a researcher to understand, describe and analyse peoples’ views through discourse
analysis with observed evidences and facts. Some characteristic of social life, experiences, and
attitudes of people, by means of expressions or discussions with varying methodological
practices4.

Conceptual explanations
In what way can political behaviour be understood? Political behaviour has various
explanations. The notion of political behaviour has attracted various definitions by different
scholars since the concept came into the attention of modern political studies in the 1950s. For
Almond, political behaviour is “a set of attitudes, cognitions, value standards, and feelings

2
Dalton, Russell J., and Hans-Dieter Klingemann. The Oxford handbook of political behaviour. No. 32.019. 5. Oxford University Press, 2007
3
See, Abramson, P. R., and Inglehart, R. (1995). Value change in global perspective. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. Inglehart, R., &
Abramson, P. R. (1994). Economic security and value change. American political science review, 88(2), 336-354.; Inglehart, R. (1997).
Modernization and post modernization: Cultural, economic, and political change in 43 societies. Princeton university press. Inglehart, R. (2018).
Culture shift in advanced industrial society. Princeton University Press. Inglehart, R. (2015). The silent revolution: Changing values and political
styles among Western publics. Princeton University Press.
4
McCusker and Gunaydin, (2015); Gough and Lyons, (2016)
toward the political system, its various roles, and role incumbents.” 5 Kim criticizes this definition
by Almond as unclear, unpredictable, pierced with uncertainties, and worthy of dumping if other
political scientists were agreeable.

Despite such criticism, Almond’s definition still constitutes the core elements that are used to
conceptualize political behaviour. Other studies conducted by the president of the Pacific
Northwest Political Science Association in 1968 see political behaviour as a “set of variables
which may be used in the construction of theories”. Furthermore, he submits that political
behaviour be “treated as both an independent and dependent variable.” In a specific term,
political behaviour refers to the emotions, prejudices, and predispositions of human beings as
occurred in their daily lives. It is these behaviours that behavioural research seeks to incorporate
and thereby putting human being as fundamental part of scientific study of politics. Its ground is
that the traditionalists’ approach to the study of political system has been prioritizing the political
institutions as an entity neglecting their individual components.6

Maltosa maintains that political behaviour remains a vital part of the individual’s actions and
provides a variety of options. For example, an authoritarian personality in another society is
more likely to behave differently from one in another culture in terms of the cultural language
and symbols he uses. This is one of the reasons why instruments designed to measure
authoritarianism in one society may not be effective in another. When different cultural groups
interact, the result may be unreliable and frustrating; they may be unable to cooperate,
misunderstand each other’s signals, and fail to agree, and so on.
Political behaviour explains the characteristics of political institutions where one may be
differentiated based on their sense of statutory or constitutional creations and their actual
operations. For example, the structural differences between the British cabinet and the American
presidential government may reflect different assumptions about authority and sovereignty.

5
Almond, G. A., & Verba, S. (2015). The civic culture: Political attitudes and democracy in five nations. Princeton university press; See also
Formisano, R. P. (2001). The concept of political culture. Journal of Interdisciplinary History, 31(3), 393-426; Welch, S. (2016). The concept of
political culture. Springer; Pye, L. W., & Verba, S. (Eds.). (1965). Political Culture and Political Development. Princeton University Press;
Somers, M. R. (1995). What's political or cultural about political culture and the public sphere? Toward an historical sociology of concept
formation. Sociological theory, 113-144; Elkins, D. J. (1979). A cause in search of its effect, or what does political culture explain? Comparative
Politics, 11(2), 127-145; Almond, G. A. (1980). The intellectual history of the civic culture concept; Almond, G. A. (2000). The study of political
culture. In Culture and Politics (pp. 5-20). Palgrave Macmillan, New York.
6
Kim, Y. C. (1964). The concept of political culture in comparative politics. The Journal of Politics, 26(2), 313-336; Easton, David, the Political
System (1953), pp. 201–205; Davis, D. W., & Davenport, C. (1999). Assessing the validity of the post materialism index. American Political
Science Review, 93(3), 649-664
Moreover, political behaviour helps to sustain institutions via a process of consensual validation,
and a pattern of interactions which are highly repetitive and mutually intelligible because in that
milieu it operates based on similar assumptions that these behaviours and actions are correct.
Thus, ideas rather than institutions, interests and demands best explain variations, especially, in
comparative studies.7

Political behaviour is classified into three that is, individualist, traditionalist, or moralist and this
classification involves certain variations in public policy and other behaviour. While this
classification is ill-defined for lack of clear details on what each orientation means, however, it
resembles Almond’s conceptualization of political behaviour because of the emphasis on a
specific pattern of orientation to political action in which each political system is grounded.8
Political behaviour is defined also as a system of political actions, which lays in a more
comprehensive system that might be considered as a political communication. 9This description
turns away from the alleged weaknesses of individual-centred definition like that of Almond and
Verba. Reflecting from the foregoing set of definitions, this study defines political behaviour as
an expression of a mind-set, which has the effect of restricting attention to alternative
behaviours, problems, and solutions, which are logically possible. Since political behaviour
represents a temperament in favour of different alternatives, consequently, other sets of options
receive little attention within a culture. In this sense, political behaviour defines the range of
acceptable possible alternatives from which groups or individuals may under different
circumstances choose a course of action. Political behaviour implies the attitudes, actions, and
shared sets of expectations about the citizens’ role to influence policy and decision making
within the political system about the citizens’ interests and opinions in politics. Political

7
Matlosa, K. (2003). Political culture and democratic governance in Southern Africa. African Journal of Political Science, 8(1), 85-112.;
Chikerema, A. F., & Chakunda, V. (2014). Political culture and democratic governance in Zimbabwe. Journal of Power, 2(1), 55-66.; Mahao, N.
(1997). The 1993 Election and the Challenges for the Development of Constitutionalism in Lesotho.
8
Elizar political behavior and Inglehart and Welzel, C. 2005. Modernization, Cultural Change, and Democracy: The Human Development
Sequence. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Baba, I. (2015). Political Culture and Democratic Transition in West Africa: The Nigerian
Experience. Universal Journal of Management, 3(3), 115-121.; Tusalem, R. F. (2009). The role of Protestantism in democratic consolidation
among transitional states. Comparative Political Studies, 42(7), 882-915.; Vráblíková, K. (2016). What Kind of Democracy: Participation,
Inclusiveness, and Contestation. Routledge.
9
Dittmer, L. (1977). Political culture and political symbolism: Toward a theoretical synthesis. World Politics, 29(4), 552-583.; Pye, L. W.
(1995). Factions and the politics of guanxi: paradoxes in Chinese administrative and political behaviour. The China Journal, (34), 35-53.;
Almond, G. A. (2000). The study of political culture. In Culture and Politics (pp. 5-20). Palgrave Macmillan, New York. Chilton, S. (1988).
Defining political culture. Western Political Quarterly, 41(3), 419-445.; Elkins, D. J. (1979). A cause in search of its effect, or what does political
culture explain. Comparative Politics, 11(2), 127-145.; Welch, S. (2016). The concept of political culture. Springer.
behaviour is a complex structure of rationally connected belief variables, shared by group
members about what motivates people to respond to a situation and how the group is organized.

Thus, political behaviour is not only meant to classify people’s behaviour toward their political
system, but to also explain diversity among and continuity within, nations and other political
groups. This could be attained in an in-depth manner than a brief emotional attitude collected
through a survey research, provoking the central belief that formed those attitudes. Meaningfully,
political behaviour symbolizes and unifies patterns of ideas not just about government but about
political life in general, meaning of social existence, social priorities, and actual policies.
Political behaviour as a concept would help a researcher to connect between political values, to
political attitude, political attitude to individual political behaviour, individual behaviour to
social choices, social choices to political policies and institutions.

Furthermore, the concept of political behaviour could help in connecting policies and institutions
to social changes. It is, therefore, important to note that an in-depth analysis of public
involvement in the political process, involvement in the resolutions distressing individuals or
electorates and possessing skills and resources to be politically active, are forces that combine to
shape the patterns of citizens’ political behaviour. 10 Furthermore, the generation in the field of
comparative political behaviour is summarized into six areas: the sophistication of mass publics,
modernization processes, political values, voting choice, political participation, and
representation.11

Therefore, political behaviour, particularly its component of public participation in politics, is

broadly considered a defining element of democratic citizenship 12. Unless citizens participate in

10
Inglehart and Welzel, C. 2005. Modernization, Cultural Change, and Democracy: The Human Development Sequence. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press. Inglehart, R. (1997). Modernization and postmodernization: Cultural, economic, and political change in 43 societies. Princeton
university press. Princeton University Press. Inglehart, R. (2018). Culture shift in advanced industrial society. Princeton University Press.Putnam,
R. D., Leonardi, R., & Nanetti, R. Y. (1994). Making democracy work: Civic traditions in modern Italy. Princeton university press.
11
Dalton, R. J. (2008). Citizenship norms and the expansion of political participation. Political studies, 56(1), 76-98.; Inglehart, R. (2018).
Culture shift in advanced industrial society. Princeton University Press; Inglehart, R. (2015). The silent revolution: Changing values and political
styles among Western publics. Princeton University Press. Marien, S., Hooghe, M., & Quintelier, E. (2010). Inequalities in non-institutionalised
forms of political participation: A multi-level analysis of 25 countries. Political Studies, 58(1), 187-213.; Dalton, R. J. (2006). Citizenship norms
and political participation in America: The good news is... the bad news is wrong. The Center for Democracy phone, 202, 687-0593.
12
Pateman, C. (1970) Participation, and Democratic Theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Verba, S., Schlozman,K. and Brady, H.
(1995) Voice and Equality: Civic Voluntarism in American Politics. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press. Dahl, R. (1998) On Democracy.
New Haven CT: Yale University Press. ; Barber, B. (2003). Strong democracy: Participatory politics for a new age. University of California
Press.
the deliberation of public policy, and their choices, structure of government and actions, then
democratic processes are meaningless. The ranges of political participation are much broader.
These ranges of political participation are essential elements of democratic citizenship
categorised into formal political partition and extra parliamentary activism comprising: voting
during elections, to be active in voluntary organizations, and to be active in politics and political
representation.13
Findings
Components of political behaviour
Political behaviour, particularly its component of civic involvement in political affairs, remains
generally reflected as significant component of representative citizenship 14. This includes formal
political participation and extra-parliamentary political action. These are vital to identify other
categories of political behaviour with their prospects. These contribute to the required academic
progress for the analysis of changing political behaviours. To highlight different components of
political behaviour, representative government is grounded by electorates’ civic constitutional
privilege, obligations and duties, and welfare through platforms like civil society groups and
associations, pressure groups, etc.

Thus, manifest political behaviour signifies practically involvement in political affairs which
includes voting during elections, protests, demonstrations, rallies, political debates, campaigns,
etc. in a reasonable and peaceful manner. This is aimed to portray the interests and needs of the
electorates to guide government policies for the benefits of the electorates in a democratic
setting.

Formal political participation

Formal political participation involves citizens taking part in electoral process to choose
aspirants that will represent them and deliver on their demands, yearnings, and needs. To desist

13
Dalton, R. J., & Klingemann, H. D. (2007). The Oxford handbook of political behaviour (No. 32.019. 5). Oxford University Press; Arnstein, S.
R. (1969). A ladder of citizen participation. Journal of the American Institute of planners, 35(4), 216-224.; Albright, J. J. (2009). Does political
knowledge erode party attachments: A review of the cognitive mobilization thesis? Electoral Studies, 28(2), 248-260.; Dalton, R. J., &
Klingemann, H. D. (2007). Citizens and political behaviour. In The Oxford handbook of political behaviour. Bengtsson, Å, & Wass, H. (2010).
Styles of political representation: What do voters expect? Journal of Elections, Public Opinion and Parties, 20(1), 55-81.; Kuklinski, J. H., &
Peyton, B. (2009). Belief systems and political decision making. In The Oxford handbook of political behaviour. Oxford University Press.
14
Pateman, C. (1970) Participation, and Democratic Theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Verba, S., Schlozman,K. and Brady, H.
(1995) Voice and Equality: Civic Voluntarism in American Politics. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press. Dahl, R. (1998) On Democracy.
New Haven CT: Yale University Press. ; Barber, B. (2003). Strong democracy: Participatory politics for a new age. University of California
Press.
from voting during election, protests, demonstrations, or rallies, against the political setup, or
present government are considered as political acts. The electorates could cast a blank vote
during an election to show political disapproval. Several types of formal political participations
at the constituent level include “contact activities”. Voters could write to representatives and
civil societies to attempt to inspire the governmental programmes and policies. In addition,
electorates enjoy the right to contest for any public office and positions in the state or federal
government seats. Other general kinds of formal political behaviours comprise of membership in
political parties, pressure groups, civil society organizations, market unions, or any other
organizations like teachers’ union, humanitarian advocacy groups, etc.15

Furthermore, formal political participation refers to individual’s involvement in electoral

political activities such as voting during elections. By choosing political leaders as the
foundation of democratic legality, this is a simple means of engaging the mass public in the
democratic process. Political science study on citizens’ commitment in politics has usually
focused on electoral participation for a long time. Voting is perceived as the main way for a
citizen to make his or her voice heard in the political system and voting turnout has been labelled
as the most frequently used measure of citizen participation. Democracy anticipates more active
participation than a non‐democratic order because democracy is intended to aggregate public
preferences into binding shared decisions. Essentially, this needs an active citizenry because it is
through interest articulation, information, and deliberation that public preferences can be
recognised, shaped, and converted into collective decisions that are considered as legitimate. 16
Extra-parliamentary activism

Another kind of political behaviour is extra parliamentary activism and manifestations. This
differs from formal political participation, which involves the use of organizational structures of
the state such as political parties, or electoral bodies, civil society groups, etc. Extra

15
Ekman, J., & Amnå, E. (2012). Political participation and civic engagement: Towards a new typology. Human affairs, 22(3), 283-300. PP288-
290; Berger, B. (2009). Political theory, political science and the end of civic engagement. Perspectives on politics, 7(2), 335-350.; Amnå, E., &
Ekman, J. (2014). Standby citizens: Understanding non-participation in contemporary democracies. In Political and Civic Engagement (pp. 118-
130). Routledge.
16
Adler, R. P., & Goggin, J. (2005). What do we mean by “civic engagement” Journal of transformative education, 3(3), 236-253.Teorell, J.,
Torcal, M., & Montero, J. R. (2007). 13 Political participation. Citizenship and involvement in European democracies: A comparative analysis,
17, 334; Van Deth, J. W. (2001, April). Studying political participation: Towards a theory of everything. In joint sessions of workshops of the
European consortium for political research, Grenoble (pp. 6-11).
parliamentary activism denotes protest behaviour or unconventional political engagement.
However, the concept of ‘unconventional engagement’ was evaded because such kind of
political behaviour was previously regarded as protest behaviour. For instance, joining strike,
endorsing a petition or joining demonstrations are not categorically considered as
unconventional. Thus, these are regarded to be extra parliamentary activism types of political
behaviours. This means creating a distinct fact to distinguish legitimate and illegitimate types.
Legitimate types of extra parliamentary political behaviour include taking part in peaceful
protests, demonstrations, rallies, strike and other types of peacefully protest activities by
electorates in order to attract attention and concern to portray electorates needs and demands
towards influencing government policies for the benefit of the general public. On the other hand,
illegitimate types of extra parliamentary political behaviour include contributing to illegitimate
protests, violent complaints, rallies, and uprisings, unlawful animal freedom groups that set
animals free or attack farms, markets, vending furs or research laboratory where animal testing is
piloted in conjunction with civil naughtiness and immoralities.
Generally, affiliation to groups and political parties is purposely not linked to legislative domain,
such as social movements and groups of several types for example, the animal safeguard
associations, worldwide justice movements, and women’s rights associations. Extra-
parliamentary political behaviour associations offer affiliates and followers the chance to
individually make a position to create meaningful change. Likewise, one might personally
participate in giving out political flyers by ratification, gathering petitions, and “embargo”.
Moreover, some products are accepted or disproved due to moral, principle, or ecological
motives. This serves as an avenue for the people, particularly, the less masses, to openly
influence the government and its top functionaries. In a contemporary study of politics, this type
17
of behaviour is referred to as “political consumption”. Extra parliamentary activism involves
indirect political participation as a voluntary commitment to social activities, which has political
effects though it does not indicate an open partisanship or has any political goals. The benefits of
extra parliamentary activism can be unity with others or the wish for self-fulfilment, which
sometimes serves as a training ground for direct partisanship. It may be in the form of simple
networks like the neighbourhood or informal associations. The examples of charity clubs are

17
Ekman, J., & Amnå, E. (2012). Political participation and civic engagement: Towards a new typology. Human affairs, 22(3), 283-300Stolle,
D., Hooghe, M. (2005). Inaccurate, Exceptional, One-Sided or Irrelevant? The Debate about the Alleged Decline of Social Capital and Civic
Engagement in Western Societies. British Journal of Political Science 35, 149-167.
neighbourhood associations, social initiatives, sports, cultural projects, and religious
organizations. Usually, extra parliamentary activism is, in most cases, discreetly political through
its impact on society and public values, through either encouraging the status quo or initiating
political responses and changes in the structures of a state. This is particularly significant to
indirect political participation like membership in social organisations, charity associations, and
religious group’s leadership quality preference.18

Moreover, extra parliamentary activism refers to participation or engagement by individuals of a

state in political activities beyond voting (non-electoral activities), for example, protests,
demonstrations, taking part in volunteer groups (joining public associations), confidence in
national government, political parties, petitions, leadership quality preferences as an aspect of
political representation and other general political activities. Indirect or informal ways of civil
participation empower the electorates to serve as checks and balance for transparency and
accountability on the government and its officials. For example, electorates may raise concern
and attention on serious problems bedeviling their standard of living. Also, the more electorates
engage in political activities and affairs, instead of only during elections periods, the greater their
ability and chances to choose and influence governmental policies for public benefits. This will
in turn give electorates more power to address or call back selfish leaders and representatives
that fail to deliver their constituents’ mandate thereby making electorates with their views and
demand more powerful in politics. To sum it up, such types of political behaviour increase the
impact of electorates’ involvement and, therefore, will expand the capacity and value of their
involvement in politics.19

Conclusion

18
Putnam, R. D., Leonardi, R., & Nanetti, R. Y. (1994). Making democracy work: Civic traditions in modern Italy. Princeton university press.
19
Dalton, R. J. (2008). Citizenship norms and the expansion of political participation. Political studies, 56(1), 76-98. Zukin, c., Keeter, S.,
Andolina, M., Jenkins, K., and Delli Carpini, M. 2006. A New Engagement? Political Participation, Civic Life, and the Changing American
Citizen. New York: Oxford University Press. ; Pattie, C., Seyd, P., and Whiteley, P. 2004. Citizenship in Britain: Values, Participation, and
Democracy. New York: Cambridge University Press.;Cain, B., Dalton, R., and Scarrow, S. eds. 2003. Democracy Transformed? Expanding
Political Opportunities in Advanced industrial Democracies. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Costa, D., and Kahn, M. 2001. Understanding the
decline in social capital, 1952–1998. Cambridge: National Bureau of Economic Research, Working Paper NO 8295; Verba, S., & Nie, N. H.
(1987). Participation in America: Political democracy and social equality. University of Chicago Press.Sabucedo, J. M., & Arce, C. (1991). Types
of political participation: A multidimensional analysis. European Journal of Political Research, 20(1), 93-102.; Van Deth, J. W. (2001, April).
Studying political participation: Towards a theory of everything. In joint sessions of workshops of the European consortium for political research,
Grenoble (pp. 6-11).; Amnå, E., & Ekman, J. (2014). Standby citizens: Understanding non-participation in contemporary democracies. In
Political and Civic Engagement (pp. 118-130). Routledge.
Therefore, in general, the manifest methods of actual political participation, which comprise
formal political participation types like taking part in elections, joining peaceful demonstrations,
rallies, strike, protests, petitions, campaigns, etc. are categorised as forms of political behaviour.
Thus, both formal and extra parliamentary activisms are important variables that represent
critical and deliberative aspects such as most pressing demands and issues of citizens’ political
behaviour20. Similarly, a good citizen should participate in democratic deliberations and discuss
politics with other citizens in order to understand the views of others. Moreover, each of the
variables formal political participation and extra-parliamentary activism are significant to attract
attention and concerns to portray the electorates’ most pressing demands and needs towards
government policies for the benefit of the general public. This will contribute positively to the
processes of democratic development.

Author Contributions
R. A. G designed and analysed the data and draft the manuscript. M.N.U. and M.M. contributed
in the manuscript draft and data curation. All authors reviewed and edited the manuscript.

References

Abramson, P. R., and Inglehart, R. (1995). Value change in global perspective. Ann Arbor:
University of Michigan Press.
Adler, R. P., & Goggin, J. (2005). What do we mean by “civic engagement” Journal of
transformative education, 3(3), 236-253.

20
Thesis-Morse, E. (1993). Conceptualizations of good citizenship and political participation. Political behaviour, 15(4), 355-380. ;(Denters, B.,
Gabriel, O. and Mariano, T. (2007) ‘Norms of Good Citizenship’, in J. van Deth, J. Ramón Montero and A. Westholm (eds), Citizenship and
Involvement in Europe. London: Routledge
Albright, J. J. (2009). Does political knowledge erode party attachments: A review of the
cognitive mobilization thesis? Electoral Studies, 28(2), 248-260.
Almond, G. A. (1980). The intellectual history of the civic culture concept; Almond, G. A.
(2000). The study of political culture. In Culture and Politics (pp. 5-20). Palgrave
Macmillan, New York.
Almond, G. A., & Verba, S. (2015). The civic culture: Political attitudes and democracy in five
nations. Princeton university press
Amnå, E., & Ekman, J. (2014). Standby citizens: Understanding non-participation in
contemporary democracies. In Political and Civic Engagement (pp. 118-130). Routledge.
Amnå, E., & Ekman, J. (2014). Standby citizens: Understanding non-participation in
contemporary democracies. In Political and Civic Engagement (pp. 118-130). Routledge.
Arnstein, S. R. (1969). A ladder of citizen participation. Journal of the American Institute of
planners, 35(4), 216-224.
Baba, I. (2015). Political Culture and Democratic Transition in West Africa: The Nigerian
Experience. Universal Journal of Management, 3(3), 115-121.
Barber, B. (2003). Strong democracy: Participatory politics for a new age. University of
California Press.
Berger, B. (2009). Political theory, political science and the end of civic engagement.
Perspectives on politics, 7(2), 335-350.
Bunce, V. (2000). Comparative democratization: Big and bounded generalizations.
Comparative Political Studies, 33(6-7), 703-734.
Cain, B., Dalton, R., and Scarrow, S. eds. 2003. Democracy Transformed? Expanding Political
Opportunities in Advanced industrial Democracies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Chikerema, A. F., & Chakunda, V. (2014). Political culture and democratic governance in
Zimbabwe. Journal of Power, 2(1), 55-66.
Chilton, S. (1988). Defining political culture. Western Political Quarterly, 41(3), 419-445.;
Elkins, D. J. (1979). A cause in search of its effect, or what does political culture explain.
Comparative Politics, 11(2), 127-145.; Welch, S. (2016). The concept of political culture.
Springer.
Costa, D., and Kahn, M. 2001. Understanding the decline in social capital, 1952–1998.
Cambridge:
Dahl, R. (1998) On Democracy. New Haven CT: Yale University Press.
Dahl, R. (1998) On Democracy. New Haven CT: Yale University Press. ; Barber, B. (2003).
Strong democracy: Participatory politics for a new age. University of California Press.
Dahl, R. (1998) On Democracy. New Haven CT: Yale University Press.
Dalton, R. J. (2006). Citizenship norms and political participation in America: The good news
is... the bad news is wrong. The Center for Democracy phone, 202, 687-0593.
Dalton, R. J. (2008). Citizenship norms and the expansion of political participation. Political
studies, 56(1), 76-98.
Dalton, R. J. (2008). Citizenship norms and the expansion of political participation. Political
studies, 56(1), 76-98.
Dalton, R. J., & Klingemann, H. D. (2007). Citizens and political behaviour. In The Oxford
handbook of political behaviour. Bengtsson, Å, & Wass, H. (2010). Styles of political
representation: What do voters expect? Journal of Elections, Public Opinion and Parties,
20(1), 55-81.
Dalton, R. J., & Klingemann, H. D. (2007). The Oxford handbook of political behaviour (No.
32.019. 5). Oxford University Press
Dalton, Russell J., and Hans-Dieter Klingemann. The Oxford handbook of political behaviour.
No. 32.019. 5. Oxford University Press, 2007
Davis, D. W., & Davenport, C. (1999). Assessing the validity of the post materialism index.
American Political Science Review, 93(3), 649-664
Denters, B., Gabriel, O. and Mariano, T. (2007) ‘Norms of Good Citizenship’, in J. van Deth, J.
Ramón Montero and A. Westholm (eds), Citizenship and Involvement in Europe.
London: Routledge
Dittmer, L. (1977). Political culture and political symbolism: Toward a theoretical synthesis.
World Politics, 29(4), 552-583.; Pye, L. W. (1995). Factions and the politics of guanxi:
paradoxes in Chinese administrative and political behaviour. The China Journal, (34),
35-53. Almond, G. A. (2000). The study of political culture. In Culture and Politics (pp.
5-20). Palgrave Macmillan, New York.
Easton, David, the Political System (1953), pp. 201–205
Ekman, J., & Amnå, E. (2012). Political participation and civic engagement: Towards a new
typology. Human affairs, 22(3), 283-300. PP288-290
Ekman, J., & Amnå, E. (2012). Political participation and civic engagement: Towards a new
typology. Human affairs, 22(3), 283-300
Elizar political behavior and Inglehart and Welzel, C. 2005. Modernization, Cultural Change,
and Democracy: The Human Development Sequence. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
Elkins, D. J. (1979). A cause in search of its effect, or what does political culture
explain? Comparative Politics, 11(2), 127-145
Formisano, R. P. (2001). The concept of political culture. Journal of Interdisciplinary
History, 31(3), 393-426
Goodin, R. E. (2000). Democratic deliberation within. Philosophy & Public Affairs, 29(1), 81-
109.
Inglehart and Welzel, C. 2005. Modernization, Cultural Change, and Democracy: The Human
Development Sequence. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Inglehart, R. (1997).
Modernization and postmodernization: Cultural, economic, and political change in 43
societies. Princeton university press. Princeton University Press.
Inglehart, R. (1997). Modernization and post modernization: Cultural, economic, and political
change in 43 societies. Princeton university press.
Inglehart, R. (2018). Culture shift in advanced industrial society. Princeton University Press.
Inglehart, R. (2015). The silent revolution: Changing values and political styles among Western
publics. Princeton University Press.
Inglehart, R. (2018). Culture shift in advanced industrial society. Princeton University Press.
Inglehart, R. (2018). Culture shift in advanced industrial society. Princeton University Press
Inglehart, R. (2015). The silent revolution: Changing values and political styles among Western
publics. Princeton University Press.
Inglehart, R., & Abramson, P. R. (1994). Economic security and value change. American
political science review, 88(2), 336-354.
Katsourides, Y. (2013). ‘Couch Activism ‘and the Individualisation of Political Demands:
Political Behaviour in Contemporary Cypriot Society. Journal of Contemporary European
Studies, 21(1), 87-103.
Kim, Y. C. (1964). The concept of political culture in comparative politics. The Journal of
Politics, 26(2), 313-336
Kitchelt, H. & Rehm, P. (2011) Political participation, in: D. Caramani (Ed.), 2nd ed., pp. 331–
351 (New York: Oxford University Press).
Kuklinski, J. H., & Peyton, B. (2009). Belief systems and political decision making. In The
Oxford handbook of political behaviour. Oxford University Press.
Mahao, N. (1997). The 1993 Election and the Challenges for the Development of
Constitutionalism in Lesotho.
Marien, S., Hooghe, M., & Quintelier, E. (2010). Inequalities in non-institutionalised forms of
political participation: A multi-level analysis of 25 countries. Political Studies, 58(1),
187-213.
Matlosa, K. (2003). Political culture and democratic governance in Southern Africa. African
Journal of Political Science, 8(1), 85-112.
National Bureau of Economic Research, Working Paper NO 8295
Pateman, C. (1970) Participation, and Democratic Theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
Pateman, C. (1970) Participation, and Democratic Theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
Pattie, C., Seyd, P., and Whiteley, P. 2004. Citizenship in Britain: Values, Participation,
and Democracy. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Putnam, R. D., Leonardi, R., & Nanetti, R. Y. (1994). Making democracy work: Civic traditions
in modern Italy. Princeton university press.
Putnam, R. D., Leonardi, R., & Nanetti, R. Y. (1994). Making democracy work: Civic traditions
in modern Italy. Princeton university press.
Pye, L. W., & Verba, S. (Eds.). (1965). Political Culture and Political Development. Princeton
University Press
Sabucedo, J. M., & Arce, C. (1991). Types of political participation: A multidimensional
analysis. European Journal of Political Research, 20(1), 93-102.
Somers, M. R. (1995). What's political or cultural about political culture and the public sphere?
Toward an historical sociology of concept formation. Sociological theory, 113-144
Stolle, D., Hooghe, M. (2005). Inaccurate, Exceptional, One-Sided or Irrelevant? The Debate
about the Alleged Decline of Social Capital and Civic Engagement in Western Societies.
British Journal of Political Science 35, 149-167.
Teorell, J., Torcal, M., & Montero, J. R. (2007). Political participation. Citizenship and
involvement in European democracies: A comparative analysis, 17, 334
Thesis-Morse, E. (1993). Conceptualizations of good citizenship and political participation.
Political behaviour, 15(4), 355-380.
Tusalem, R. F. (2009). The role of Protestantism in democratic consolidation among transitional
states. Comparative Political Studies, 42(7), 882-915.
Van Deth, J. W. (2001, April). Studying political participation: Towards a theory of everything.
In joint sessions of workshops of the European consortium for political research,
Grenoble (pp. 6-11).
Van Deth, J. W. (2001, April). Studying political participation: Towards a theory of everything.
In joint sessions of workshops of the European consortium for political research,
Grenoble (pp. 6-11).
Vanhanen, T. (2000). A new dataset for measuring democracy, 1810-19
Verba, S., & Nie, N. H. (1987). Participation in America: Political democracy and social
equality. University of Chicago Press.
Verba, S., Schlozman,K. and Brady, H. (1995) Voice and Equality: Civic Voluntarism in
American Politics. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.
Verba, S., Schlozman,K. and Brady, H. (1995) Voice and Equality: Civic Voluntarism in
American Politics. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.
Vráblíková, K. (2016). What Kind of Democracy: Participation, Inclusiveness, and
Contestation. Routledge.
Welch, S. (2016). The concept of political culture. Springer
Zukin, c., Keeter, S., Andolina, M., Jenkins, K., and Delli Carpini, M. 2006. A New
Engagement? Political Participation, Civic Life, and the Changing American Citizen.
New York: Oxford University Press.