Julie Hassing Nielsen

Personality and Euroscepticism: The Impact of Personality on Attitudes Towards the EU

Attitudes towards EU integration are widely studied, yet we know only little about the role of personality for EU attitudes. Utilizing a framing experiment encompassing positive and negative frames of EU integration, this article reports on how personality influences attitudes towards EU integration, and how personal predispositions moderate framing effects, impacting EU attitude formation. The study relies on Danish and Swedish data (N = 1808). I test both the direct impact of personality on EU attitudes and personalitys moderating impact on framing effects. I find that extraversion and openness positively correlate with positive EU attitudes, while people scoring high on neuroticism tend to support the EU less. Furthermore, I find that personality moderates different EU frames. Individuals with certain personality traits are more influenced by framing effects than others, while positive and negative frames also are perceived differently according to personal predispositions. I find only little country differences between Denmark and Sweden.

Do Group Decision Rules Affect Trust? A Laboratory Experiment on Group Decision Rules and Trust

Enhanced participation has been prescribed as the way forward for improving democratic decision making while generating positive attributes like trust. Yet we do not know the extent to which rules affect the outcome of decision making. This article investigates how different group decision rules affect group trust by testing three ideal types of decision rules (i.e., a Unilateral rule, a Representative rule and a ‘Non-rule’) in a laboratory experiment. The article shows significant differences between the three decision rules on trust after deliberation. Interestingly, however, it finds that the Representative rule yields more trust than the Non-rule and also significantly more trust than the Unilateral rule, when analysing the results at group level. These findings challenge the theoretical understanding by, for example, deliberative normative theorists that more inclusive, consensual and non-hierarchical decision-making procedures enhance trust vis-a-vis other more hierarchical decision-making procedures.

The effect of affect: How affective style determines attitudes towards the EU

Research shows that affective style (i.e. our individual ways of responding to emotions) matters for social behaviour. This article explores how affective style, as a new key predictor, explains attitudes towards the European Union, encompassing the feeling of internal efficacy towards the EU and trust in the EU. The study relies on survey data from Denmark (2014). The article concludes that the affective styles of tolerating, concealing and adjusting all significantly predict EU attitudes, albeit in different ways. Adjusting is positively associated with EU attitudes, while tolerating and concealing are negatively related to EU attitudes. Mediation analysis shows that most of personalitys effect is not mediated by affective style. Hence, most of the effect of affective style is not merely a transmission of prior personality effect.

The 2014 European Parliament Elections: Still Second Order?

Here we set the scene for the book, questioning the reasons for the phenomenal success of eurosceptic parties at the European Parliament (EP) elections of 2014 and considering the likely consequences. Above all, did these elections represent a new phenomenon, no longer “second order” in nature? We define this term and introduce a new term—“second rate”—to describe an aspect of EP elections that distinguishes them from other second-order elections with more immediately evident policy consequences. The chapter goes on to discuss whether the second-order character of these elections might actually help to account for their more remarkable features. It also defines and introduces additional terms that are used in the book and provides an overview of the chapters that follow.

Conclusions: The 2014 EP Elections as a Lens on Euroscepticism

Drawing on the findings of the previous chapters, we assess whether it continues to be helpful for European Parliament (EP) elections to be termed “second order” and/or “second rate”. The 2014 EP elections were indeed still second rate and also predominantly second order. Being “about Europe”, which undoubtedly was also the case, does not make them less deserving of either title, and the character of these elections that made them so extraordinary would have been very different had they not remained predominantly second order. The final chapter assesses if the character displayed by the 2014 EP elections is likely to be reflected in later national elections and the circumstances in which those results could lead to substantial policy and/or membership changes in the European Union (EU).

The Democratic Challenges of the EU Presidency after the Lisbon Treaty

Neben der Wirtschaftskrise stellte der Vertrag von Lissabon eine Herausforderung fur Danemarks siebente EU-Ratsprasidentschaft dar und veranderte diese, indem der neue Hohe Vertreter der EU fur Ausen- und Sicherheitspolitik als standiger Prasident des EU-Rates und der Trio-Prasidentschaft eingesetzt wurde. In diesem Artikel untersuchen wir am Beispiel der danischen Prasidentschaft 2012 die Konsequenzen auf demokratischer Ebene, die mit der Veranderung der EU-Ratsprasidentschaft angestosen wurden. Hierfur beurteilen wir die Veranderungen mit Hilfe eines Input-Output-Legitimitatsrahmen, wobei wir uns auf das Europaische Parlament (EP) und die Fahigkeit der Politikwirksamkeit der europaischen Bevolkerung wahrend der EU-Ratsprasidentschaft konzentrieren. Ausgehend vom danischen Beispiel ist unsere These, dass die Veranderungen in der EU-Ratsprasidentschaft die Fahigkeit der europaischen Bevolkerung, auf den Entscheidungsprozess Einfluss zu nehmen, einschranken, da die Gewalten auf neue dauerhafte Institutionen ubertragen wurden.

Do Election Rules Affect Deliberation? An Experiment on Deliberative Election Rules and Group Trust

Enhanced deliberation has been prescribed as the way forward to improve democratic decision-making, while generating positive attributes like trust and legitimacy. Yet, we do not know to what extent different decision-making election rules affect the deliberative process and its outcome. This article investigates to what extent different election rules in deliberative decision-making affect group trust by testing three ideal types of election rules (i.e. a dictator election rule, a representative election rule and a consensus rule) in a laboratory experiment. The findings show that the differences in election rules have a significant impact on the level of trust after deliberation. Interestingly, however, we find that the election rule of representative democracy yield more group trust than does the election rule of pure consensus and non-hierarchical decision-making. Thus our findings challenge the understanding by deliberative normative theorists that the more inclusion and consensus in the decision-making procedure the more trust and legitimacy amongst its participants.