Re-evaluating the relationship between electoral rules and ideological congruence

Matt Golder, Gabriella Lloyd

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

48 Scopus citations


Two new studies challenge the prevailing consensus that proportional representation (PR) systems produce greater ideological congruence between governments and their citizens than majoritarian ones. This has led to what has become known as the 'ideological congruence controversy'. G. Bingham Powell claims to resolve this controversy in favour of PR systems. Specifically, he argues that the results from the two new studies are based on an anomalous decade and that PR systems generally do produce greater government congruence. In addition, he also asserts that PR systems exhibit less variability in government congruence. In this article, the empirical evidence for these two claims is re-evaluated using exactly the same data as employed by Powell. The analysis indicates that although PR systems produce better and more consistent representation in the legislature, they do not hold an advantage when it comes to representation at the governmental level.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)200-212
Number of pages13
JournalEuropean Journal of Political Research
Issue number1
StatePublished - Feb 2014

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Sociology and Political Science


Dive into the research topics of 'Re-evaluating the relationship between electoral rules and ideological congruence'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this