ALLBUS-Bibliographie 25. Fassung, Stand - SSOAR

GESIS Technical Report 2011|06 167
Abstract: "German unification was primarily a policy and economic challenge to
unify two fundamentally different socio-political systems. In addition, it was a cultural
challenge to unify two political cultures that had widely divergent histories.
This article examines some of the basic aspects of cultural divide that were created
by German unification. We first compare feelings of national identity between West
and East, finding a lingering Eastern attachment to an Ostdeutsche identity. Second,
we examine attitudes towards democracy, finding a convergence in support for democratic
principles but persisting differences in approval of the functioning of the
democratic process. Third, we describe attitudes toward the role of the state, demonstrating
the more expansive role favoured by Easterners. We conclude that significant
differences in these aspects of the political culture endure even 20 years after
unification. Still, we are more sanguine that these differences do not pose fundamental
political problems, and some Eastern sentiments might even benefit politics in the
Federal Republic." Neben dem World Value Survey als Hauptdatensatz verwenden
die Autoren auch Daten des ALLBUS.
Aufgenommen: 25. Fassung, März 2011
Dancygier, Rafaela und Saunders, Elizabeth N., (2006). A New Electorate? Comparing
Preferences and Partisanship between Immigrants and Natives. American Journal
of Political Science, 50: 962-981.
Abstract: "As immigrants constitute a large and rising share of both the population
and the electorate in many developed democracies, we examine aspects of immigrant
political behavior, a vital issue that has gone largely unexplored outside of the U.S.
context. We focus on Germany and Great Britain, two countries that provide good
leverage to explore both within-country and cross-national variation in Europe. Our
overall aim is to assess the impact of the immigration context. As a first step, we
investigate whether immigrants and natives have systematically different attitudes on
two issues that have dominated postwar European politics: social spending and redistribution.
With controls in place, we observe that immigrants are no more likely to
support increased social spending or redistributive measures than natives and find
support for hypotheses highlighting selection effects and the impact of the immigration
regime. Where we do find an opinion gap, immigrants tend to have more conservative
preferences than natives. As a second step, we explore the determinants of
immigrant partisan identification in Britain and find that the salience of the immigration
context helps explain immigrants' partisan attachment to the Labour Party. [...]
We make use of two surveys, which we analyze separately. For the German case, we
use the 1996 German Social Survey (ALLBUS), a dataset containing 3518 German
speakers and an oversample of East Germans (ZUMA 1997). The survey contains
306 first-generation immigrants from relatively poor countries (our coding is discussed
in the appendix). For Britain, we employ the 1997 British General Election
Cross-Section Survey, conducted right after the general elections in May 1997
(Heath and Saggar 2000; Heath et al. 2000)."