Political Systems
Main research areas
Political Systems 

Main research areas

Research area „Mixed electoral systems“

 

While there is a broad consensus that electoral systems are crucial factors for the quality of democracies, the question of which electoral systems should be preferred over others is hard to answer, since electoral system shall fulfill various, partially conflicting demands at the same time. With a focus on mixed electoral systems, we compare the functionality of different system types in varying contexts on national and sub-national levels.
 
Projects in in this research area have been financially supported by the German Research Foundation (DFG) between 2012 and 2015.
Recent publications in this field are:

  • Linhart, Eric and Kristin Eichhorn (2024): Electoral systems and party systems in Germany on the local level, German Politics 33(3): 584-610.
  • Linhart, Eric, Michael Jankowski and Markus Tepe (2023): Electoral System Preferences of Citizens Compared: Evidence from a Conjoint Experiment in Germany, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom, European Political Science Review 15(4): 671-689.
  • Jankowski, Michael, Eric Linhart and Markus Tepe (2022): Keep it simple! German voters’ limited competence to evaluate electoral systems’ functions, German Politics 31(4): 579-601.
  • Linhart, Eric, Johannes Raabe and Patrick Statsch (2019): Mixed-member proportional electoral systems – the best of both worlds? Journal of Elections, Public Opinion and Parties 29(1): 21-40.
  • Raabe, Johannes and Eric Linhart (2018): Which electoral systems succeed at providing proportionality and concentration? Promising designs and risky tools, European Political Science Review 10(2): 167-190.

Research area “Parties’ office and policy motivations in coalition formation processes”

 

Recent coalition theories account for both parties’ office and policy motivations. Although some of the respective models have been developed in the 1990s already, their empirical corroboration is still a field of research with many open questions. Our research focus contributes to such questions, primarily with regard to coalition formation in Germany. Beyond empirical analyses, we develop and refine models of coalition formation. Such refinements largely follow two strands. First, the above mentioned theories treat offices and policy as independent of each other, although ministers strongly influence policy outputs within their portfolios. This connection between offices and policy has to be taken in account by advanced theories. Second, existing coalition theories largely ignore that parties are not only motivated by offices and policy, but also by votes. We refine coalition models in this regard.
 
Projects in in this research area have been financially supported by the German Research Foundation (DFG) between 2008 and 2012.
Recent publications in this field are:

  • Linhart, Eric (2025): Office- and policy-seeking theories of coalition formation, in: Bräuninger, Thomas und Marc Debus (Eds.): Handbook on Coalition Politics. Cheltenham, Edward Elgar Publishing: 42-58.
  • Graichen, Robin, Suresh Lodha, Manav Bhatia, Udo Heller and Eric Linhart (2023): Identifying utility-maximizing and equilibrium coalitions of political parties in government formation processes using a visualization approach, Social Science Computer Review 41(6): 2105-2121.
  • Linhart, Eric (2023): Regierungsbildung und Regierungskoalition. Die Bildung der Ampelkoalition nach der Bundestagswahl 2021 aus Sicht der formalen Koalitionstheorie, in: Korte, Karl-Rudolf, Maximilian Schiffers, Arno von Schuckmann und Sandra Plümer (Hrsg.): Die Bundestagswahl 2021. Analysen der Wahl-, Parteien-, Kommunikations- und Regierungsforschung. Wiesbaden, Springer VS: 597-622.
  • Graichen, Robin, Eric Linhart, Christopher Schuster, Udo Heller and Andreas Müller (2021): Coalizer: A coalition tool combining office and policy motivations of political parties, Journal of Information Technology & Politics 18(3): 274-292.

Research area “Voting as a rational decision”

 

The analysis of strategic voting is of growing interest since some years. From a normative point of view, the prevalence of incentives to vote strategically can be seen as problematic: If such incentives exist, a voter has to make a hard choice between the alternative she likes most and the option which maximizes her (expected) utility. Further, the rational choice might be hard to detect in multi-party settings. Our research in this area therefore contributes to questions regarding incentives for strategic voting. Among others, we analyze in which electoral situations voters are or are not likely to detect utility maximizing choices, if and how coalition signals moderate this effect, and under which circumstances voters tend to vote strategically.

Recent publications in this field are:

  • Linhart, Eric and Johannes Raabe (2018): Different rationales of coalition formation and incentives for strategic voting, Applied Mathematics 9(7): 836-860.
  • Linhart, Eric and Markus Tepe (2015): Rationales Wählen in Mehrparteiensystemen mit Koalitionsregierungen. Eine laborexperimentelle Untersuchung, Politische Vierteljahresschrift 56(1): 44-76.
  • Bytzek, Evelyn, Thomas Gschwend, Sascha Huber, Eric Linhart and Michael Meffert (2012): Koalitionssignale und ihre Wirkungen auf Wahlentscheidungen, Politische Vierteljahresschrift (Sonderheft 45/2011): 393-418.

Research area “Estimation of party positions”

 

Knowledge about party positions in policy spaces is necessary for many political science sub-fields. The study of political parties needs such information in order to categorize parties. Coalition research needs estimations of party positions in order to evaluate different possible coalitions with regard to parties’ policy motivation. An electoral studies must refer to party positions when they contribute to the question of how strongly policy congruence determines voting decisions. Different methods to estimate party positions, however, are confronted with their own limitations. Further, they lead to – at least slightly – varying results. The research focus at hand therefore aims to develop appropriate methods for the estimation of party positions and compare different methods’ results.

Recent publications in this field are:

  • Linhart, Eric (2018): Zur programmatischen Kohäsion der Fraktionen im Europäischen Parlament, in: Hilz, Wolfram and Antje Nötzold (Hrsg.): Die Zukunft Europas in einer Welt im Umbruch. Wiesbaden, Springer VS: 163-183.
  • Linhart, Eric (2017): Politische Positionen der AfD auf Landesebene: Eine Analyse auf Basis von Wahl-O-Mat-Daten, Zeitschrift für Parlamentsfragen 48(1): 102-123.
  • Linhart, Eric (2010): Die Bedeutung der Landwirtschaft in Wahlprogrammen von Agrarparteien, Zeitschrift für Vergleichende Politikwissenschaft 4(1): 79-103.
  • Linhart, Eric and Susumu Shikano (2009): Ideological signals of German parties in a multi-dimensional space: An estimation of party preferences using the CMP data, German Politics 18(3): 301-322.

Research area “Empirical lobby group research”

 

Lobby groups influence policy via a plethora of channels. Among others, they send experts to parliamentary committees, they officially comment bills in ministries, and they affect public debates in the media. While the lobby groups have been primarily researched from a theoretical view for a long time – in particular in Germany –, more studies contribute to empirical questions recently. For example, researchers need to know which lobby groups are powerful in which policy fields, which stakeholders have similar interests and could form advocacy coalitions, or which connections can be found between lobby groups and single parties. At the Chemnitz University of Technology, we also contribute to such questions.

Recent publications in this field are:

  • Hüttemann, Niclas and Eric Linhart (2026): Lobbying for Corporate Due Diligence: Interest Group Positions on the German Supply Chain Act, Journal of Civil Society (online first).
  • Hüttemann, Niclas and Eric Linhart (2025): Does responsibility matter in domestic discourses on human rights due diligence legislation? Analyzing interest groups’ discourse on Germany’s Supply Chain Act, Journal of Human Rights 24(5): 591-608.
  • König, Tim and Eric Linhart (2025): Semantische Netzwerkanalysen als Alternative zu qualitativen Diskursanalysen? Eine Studie am Beispiel der Novelle zum Erneuerbare-Energien-Gesetz 2014, Zeitschrift für Diskursforschung 12(2): 163-188.
  • Hüttemann, Niclas and Eric Linhart (2022): Interessenvermittlung in den Ausschüssen des Deutschen Bundestages. Eine Erweiterung und Fortschreibung für die 18. Wahlperiode (2013 bis 2017), Zeitschrift für Parlamentsfragen 53(3): 507–526.
  • Bahnsen, Oke and Eric Linhart (2018): Politische Diskurse in Print- und Online-Medien. Eine empirische Analyse am Beispiel der Novelle des Erneuerbare-Energien-Gesetzes 2014, Zeitschrift für Diskursforschung 6(3): 277-305.