Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-v9fdk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-13T02:28:59.500Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

References

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 January 2023

Lisa Dellmuth  and
Jonas Tallberg
Lisa Dellmuth
Affiliation:
Stockholms Universitet
Jonas Tallberg
Affiliation:
Stockholms Universitet

Summary

A summary is not available for this content. As you have access to this content, full HTML content is provided on this page. A PDF of this content is also available in through the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
Type
Chapter
Information
Legitimacy Politics
Elite Communication and Public Opinion in Global Governance
 , pp. 227 - 255
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2023
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BYCreative Common License - NCCreative Common License - ND
This content is Open Access and distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 https://creativecommons.org/cclicenses/

References

Aaroe, Lene. 2012. When Citizens Go against Elite Directions: Partisan Cues and Contrast Effects on Citizens’ Attitudes. Party Politics 18(2): 215–233.Google Scholar
Abromowitz, Alan I. 2010. The Disappearing Center: Engaged Citizens, Polarization, and American Democracy. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
ABS-CBN News. 2018. Duterte Says UN Useless, Tells Suu Kyi to Ignore Human Rights Critics. January 26, 2018. Internet: https://news.abs-cbn.com/news/01/26/18/duterte-says-un-useless-tells-suu-kyi-to-ignore-human-rights-critics (last accessed July 5, 2022).Google Scholar
Achen, Christopher H., and Bartels, Larry M.. 2016. Democracy for Realists: Why Elections Do Not Produce Responsive Government. Princeton, NY: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Adler, Emanuel, and Drieschova, Alena. 2021. The Epistemological Challenge of Truth Subversion to the Liberal International Order. International Organization 75(2): 359–386.Google Scholar
Adler-Nissen, Rebecca, and Zarakol, Ayse. 2021. Struggles for Recognition: The Liberal International Order and the Merger of Its Discontents. International Organization 75 (2): 611–634.Google Scholar
Agné, Hans. 2018. Legitimacy in Global Governance Research: How Normative or Sociological Should It Be? In Legitimacy in Global Governance, edited by Tallberg, Jonas, Bäckstrand, Karin, and Scholte, Jan Aart, 20–36. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Agné, Hans, Dellmuth, Lisa, and Tallberg, Jonas. 2015. Does Stakeholder Involvement Foster Democratic Legitimacy in International Organizations? An Empirical Assessment of a Normative Theory. Review of International Organizations 10(4): 465–488.Google Scholar
Aldrich, John H., Sullivan, John L., and Borgida, Eugene. 1989. Foreign Affairs and Issue Voting: Do Presidential Candidates “Walz Before A Blind Audience”? American Political Science Review 83(1): 123–141.Google Scholar
Aldrich, John H., Gelpi, Christopher, Feaver, Peter, Reifler, Jason, and Thompson Sharp, Kristin. 2006. Foreign Policy and the Electoral Connection. Annual Review of Political Science 9(1): 477–502.Google Scholar
Anderson, Christopher J., and Reichert, Michael S.. 1995. Economic Benefits and Support for Membership in the EU: A Cross-National Analysis. Journal of Public Policy 15(3): 231–249.Google Scholar
Anderson, Christopher J., Blais, André, Bowler, Shaun, Donovan, Todd, and Listhaug, Ola. 2005. Losers’ Consent: Elections and Democratic Legitimacy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Anderson, Brilé, Bernauer, Thomas, and Kachi, Aya. 2019. Does International Pooling of Authority Affect the Perceived Legitimacy of Global Governance? Review of International Organizations 14(4): 661–683.Google Scholar
Ansolabehere, Stephen, and Rivers, Douglas. 2013. Cooperative Survey Research. Annual Review of Political Science 16(1): 307–329.Google Scholar
Ansolabehere, Stephen, and Schaffner, Brian F.. 2014. Does Survey Mode Still Matter? Findings from a 2010 Multi-Mode Comparison. Political Analysis 22(3): 285–303.Google Scholar
Anstead, Nick, and O’Loughlin, Ben. 2015. Social Media Analysis and Public Opinion: The 2010 UK General Election. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 20(2): 204–220.Google Scholar
Archibugi, Daniele, Koenig-Archibugi, Mathias, and Marchetti, Raffaele, eds. 2012. Global Democracy: Normative and Empirical Perspectives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Armingeon, Klaus, and Ceka, Besir. 2014. The Loss of Trust in the European Union during the Great Recession since 2007: The Role of Heuristics from the National Political System. European Union Politics 15(1): 82–107.Google Scholar
Arnold, Christian, and Rittberger, Berthold. 2013. The Legalization of Dispute Resolution in Mercosur. Journal of Politics in Latin America 5(3): 97–132.Google Scholar
Bäckstrand, Karin, and Söderbaum, Fredrik. 2018. Legitimation and Delegitimation in Global Governance: Discursive, Institutional, and Behavioral Practices. In Legitimacy in Global Governance: Sources, Processes, and Consequences, edited by Tallberg, Jonas, Bäckstrand, Karin, and Scholte, Jan Aart, 101–118. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Bakaki, Zorzeta, and Bernauer, Thomas. 2017. Do Global Climate Summits Influence Public Awareness and Policy Preferences Concerning Climate Change? Environmental Politics 26(1): 1–26.Google Scholar
Banchoff, Thomas, and Smith, Mitchell. 1999. Legitimacy and the European Union: The Contested Polity. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Bansak, Kirk, Hainmueller, Jens, Hopkins, Daniel J., and Yamamoto, Teppei. 2018. The Number of Choice Tasks and Survey Satisficing in Conjoint Experiments. Political Analysis 26(1): 112–119.Google Scholar
Barker, Rodney. 2001. Legitimating Identities. The Self-Presentation of Rulers and Subjects. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Barnett, Michael N. 1997. Bringing in the New World Order: Liberalism, Legitimacy, and the United Nations. World Politics 49(4): 526–551.Google Scholar
Barnett, Michael, and Duvall, Raymond. 2005. Power in International Politics.International Organization 59(1): 39–75.Google Scholar
Barnett, Michael, and Finnemore, Martha. 2004. Rules for the World: International Organizations in Global Politics. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Baum, Matthew A., and Groeling, Tim. 2009. Shot by the Messenger: Partisan Cues and Public Opinion Regarding National Security and War. Political Behavior 31(2): 157–186.Google Scholar
Baumeister, Roy F., Bratslavsky, Ellen, Finkenauer, Catrin, and Vohs, Kathleen D.. 2001. Bad Is Stronger Than Good. Review of General Psychology 5(4): 323–370.Google Scholar
Bearce, David H., and Jolliff Scott, Brandy J.. 2019. Popular Non-support for International Organizations: How Extensive and What Does This Represent? Review of International Organizations 14(2): 187–216.Google Scholar
Bechtel, Michael M., and Scheve, Kenneth F.. 2013. Mass Support for Global Climate Agreements Depends on Institutional Design. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 110(34): 13763–13768.Google Scholar
Bechtel, Michael, Jens, Hainmueller, Hangartner, Dominik, and Marc, Helbling 2015. Reality Bites: The Limits of Framing Effects for Salient and Contested Policy Issues. Political Science Research and Methods 3(3): 683–695.Google Scholar
Beetham, David. 1991. The Legitimation of Power. Atlantic Highlands, NJ: Humanities Press International.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berinsky, Adam J. 2009. In Time of War: Understanding American Public Opinion from World War II to Iraq. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Berinsky, Adam J., Huber, Gregory A., and Lenz, Gabriel S.. 2012. Evaluating Online Labor Markets for Experimental Research: Amazon.com’s Mechanical Turk. Political Analysis 20(3): 351–368.Google Scholar
Bernauer, Thomas, and Gampfer, Robert. 2013. Effects of Civil Society Involvement on Popular Legitimacy of Global Environmental Governance. Global Environmental Change 23(2): 439–449.Google Scholar
Bernauer, Thomas, Mohrenberg, Steffen, and Koubi, Vally. 2020. Do Citizens Evaluate International Cooperation Based on Information about Procedural and Outcome Quality? Review of International Organizations 15(2): 505–529.Google Scholar
Bernstein, Steven. 2005. Legitimacy in Global Environmental Governance. International Journal of Comparative Labour Law and Industrial Relations 1(1): 139–166.Google Scholar
Bernstein, Steven. 2011. Legitimacy in Intergovernmental and Non-state Global Governance. Review of International Political Economy 18(1): 17–51.Google Scholar
Bes, Bart Joachim, Sommerer, Thomas, and Agné, Hans. 2019. On Legitimacy Crises and the Resources of Global Governance Institutions: A Surprisingly Weak Relationship? Global Policy 10(3): 313–326.Google Scholar
Best, Heinrich, Lengyel, György, and Verzichelli, Luca, eds. 2012. The Europe of Elites: A Study into the Europeanness of Europe’s Political and Economic Elites. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Bexell, Magdalena, and Jönsson, Kristina. 2018. Audiences of (De)legitimation in Global Governance. In Legitimacy in Global Governance, edited by Tallberg, Jonas, Bäckstrand, Karin, and Scholte, Jan Aart, 119–133. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Bexell, Magdalena, Jönsson, Kristina, and Stappert, Nora. 2021. Whose Legitimacy Beliefs Count? Targeted Audiences in Global Governance Legitimation Processes. Journal of International Relations and Development 24:482–508.Google Scholar
Bexell, Magdalena, Jönsson, Kristina, and Uhlin, Anders, eds. 2022. Legitimation and Delegitimation in Global Governance: Practices, Justifications, and Audiences. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Beyeler, Michelle, and Kriesi, Hanspeter. 2005. Transnational Protest and the Public Sphere. Mobilization 10(1): 95–110.Google Scholar
Biegón, Dominika, and Gronau, Jennifer. 2012. Die Legitimationsbemühungen internationaler Institutionen. Leviathan Sonderband 27: 171–189.Google Scholar
Binder, Martin, and Heupel, Monica. 2015. The Legitimacy of the UN Security Council: Evidence from Recent General Assembly Debates. International Studies Quarterly 59(2): 238–250.Google Scholar
Bisgaard, Martin, and Slothuus, Rune. 2018. Partisan Elites as Culprits: How Party Cues Shape Partisan Perceptual Gaps. American Journal of Political Science 62(2): 456–469.Google Scholar
Bloom, Howard S., and Price, H. Douglas. 1975. Voter Response to Short-Run Economic Conditions: The Asymmetric Effect of Prosperity and Recession. American Political Science Review 69(4): 1240–1254.Google Scholar
Bobbio, Norberto. 1996. Left and Right: The Significance of a Political Distinction. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Bodansky, Daniel M. 1999. The Legitimacy of International Governance: A Coming Challenge for International Environmental Law? American Journal of International Law 93(3): 596–624.Google Scholar
Booth, John A., and Seligson, Mitchell A.. 2009. The Legitimacy Puzzle in Latin America: Political Support and Democracy in Eight Nations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
von Borzyskowski, Inken, and Vabulas, Felicity. 2019. Hello, Goodbye: When Do States Withdraw from International Organizations? Review of International Organizations 14(2): 335–336.Google Scholar
Bow, Brian. 2015. Legitimacy and Regional Integration: The North American Experience in Comparative Perspective. In The Legitimacy of Regional Integration in Europe and the Americas, edited by Hurrelmann, Achim and Schneider, Steffen, 33–56. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Broockman, David E., and Butler, Daniel M.. 2017. The Causal Effects of Elite Position-Taking on Voter Attitudes: Field Experiments with Elite Communication. American Journal of Political Science 61(1): 208–221.Google Scholar
Brooks, Stephen G., and Wohlworth, William C.. 2015/2016. The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers in the Twenty-First Century: China’s Rise and the Fate of America’s Global Position. International Security 40(3): 7–53.Google Scholar
Brutger, Ryan, and Clark, Richard. 2022. At What Cost? Power, Payments, and Public Support of International Organizations. Review of International Organizations. Forthcoming.Google Scholar
Buchanan, Allen, and Keohane, Robert. 2006. The Legitimacy of Global Governance Institutions. Ethics & International Affairs 20(4): 405–437.Google Scholar
Bühlmann, Marc, and Kunz, Ruth. 2011. Confidence in the Judiciary: Comparing the Independence and Legitimacy of Judicial Systems. West European Politics 34(2): 317–345.Google Scholar
Bullock, John. G. 2011. Elite Influence on Public Opinion in an Informed Electorate. American Political Science Review 105(3): 496–515.Google Scholar
Busby, Ethan, Flynn, D. J., and Druckman, James N.. 2018. Studying Framing Effects on Political Preferences. In Doing News Framing Analysis II, edited by D’Angelo, P., 27–50. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Caldeira, Gregory A. 1986. Neither the Purse Nor the Sword: Dynamics of Public Confidence in the Supreme Court. American Political Science Review 80(4): 1209–1226.Google Scholar
Caldeira, Gregory A., and Gibson, James L.. 1992. The Etiology of Public Support for the Supreme Court. American Journal of Political Science 36(3): 635–664.Google Scholar
Caldeira, Gregory A., and Gibson, James L.. 1995. The Legitimacy of the Court of Justice in the European Union: Models of Institutional Support. American Political Science Review 89(2): 356–376.Google Scholar
Campbell, Angus, Converse, Philip. E., Miller, Warren. E., and Stokes, Donald. E.. 1960. The American Voter. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Carey, Sean. 2002. Undivided Loyalties. Is National Identity an Obstacle to European Integration? European Union Politics 3(4): 387–413.Google Scholar
Carmines, Edward G., and D'Amico, Nicholas J.. 2015. Heuristic Decision Making. In Emerging Trends in the Social and Behavioral Sciences, edited by Scott, Robert A. and Kosslyn, Stephen M.. Hoboken, NY: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
Carmines, Edward G., and Kuklinski, James H. 1990. Incentives, Opportunities, and the Logic of Public Opinion in American Political Representation. In Information and Democratic Processes, edited by Ferejohn, John A. and Kuklinski, James H., 240–268. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
Cavari, Amnon, and Freedman, Guy. 2019. Partisan Cues and Opinion Formation on Foreign Policy. American Politics Research 47(1): 29–57.Google Scholar
Chalmers, Adam W., and Dellmuth, Lisa. 2015. Fiscal Redistribution and Public Support for European Integration. European Union Politics 16(3): 386–407.Google Scholar
Chan, Gabriel, Carlo Carraro, Ottmar Edenhofer, Kolstad, Charles, and Stavins, Robert. 2016. Reforming the IPCC’s Assessment of Climate Change Economics. Climate Change Economics 7(1): 1640001.Google Scholar
Chapman, Terrence L. 2009. Audience Beliefs and International Organization Legitimacy. International Organization 63(4): 733–764.Google Scholar
Chapman, Terrence L., and Chaudoin, Stephen. 2020. Public Reactions to International Legal Institutions: The International Criminal Court in a Developing Democracy. Journal of Politics 82(4)Google Scholar
Chaudoin, Stephen. 2014. Promises or Policies? An Experimental Analysis of International Agreements and Audience Reactions. International Organization 68(1): 235–256.Google Scholar
Chong, Dennis, and Druckman, James N.. 2007a. Framing Theory. Annual Review of Political Science 10(1): 103–126.Google Scholar
Chong, Dennis, and Druckman, James N.. 2007b. A Theory of Opinion Formation in Competitive Elite Environments. Journal of Communication 57(1): 99–118.Google Scholar
Chong, Dennis, and Druckman, James N.. 2010. Dynamic Public Opinion: Communication Effects over Time. American Political Science Review 104(4): 663–680.Google Scholar
Christiano, Thomas. 2010. Democratic Legitimacy and International Institutions. In The Philosophy of International Law, edited by Besson, Samantha and Tasioulas, John, 119–137. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Claassen, Ryan L., and Highton, Benjamin. 2009. Policy Polarization among Party Elites and the Significance of Political Awareness in the Mass Public. Political Research Quarterly 62(3): 538–551.Google Scholar
Clarke, Kamari, Knottnerus, Abel S., and de Volder, Eefje. 2016. Africa and the ICC. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Cohen, Cathy J., and Luttig, Matthew D.. 2020. Reconceptualizing Political Knowledge: Race, Ethnicity, and Carceral Violence. Perspectives on Politics 18(3): 805–818.Google Scholar
Colantone, Italo, and Stanig, Piero. 2019. The Rise of Economic Nationalism in Western Europe. Journal of Economic Perspectives 33(4): 128–151.Google Scholar
Converse, Philip E. 1964. The Nature of Belief Systems in the Mass Public. In Ideology and Discontent, edited by Apter, David E., 206–261. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Copelovitch, Mark, and Pevehouse, Jon C. W.. 2019. International Organizations in a New Era of Populist Nationalism. Review of International Organizations 14: 169–186.Google Scholar
Copelovitch, Mark, and Pevehouse, Jon C. W.. 2019. International Organizations in a New Era of Populist Nationalism. Review of International Organizations 14(2): 169–186.Google Scholar
Cox, Robert W., and Jacobson, Harold K.. 1973. The Anatomy of Influence: Decision Making in International Organizations. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Curtis, K. Amber, Jupille, Joseph, and Leblang, David. 2014. Iceland on the Rocks: The Mass Political Economy of Sovereign Debt Resettlement. International Organization 68(3): 721–740.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dahl, Robert A. 1999. Can International Organizations Be Democratic? A Skeptic's View. In Democracy's Edges, edited by Shapiro, Ian and Hacker-Cordon, Casiano, 19–36. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Dahl, Robert A., and Lindblom, Charles. 1992. Politics, Markets, and Welfare. 2nd ed. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Press.Google Scholar
Dalton, Russel J. 2008. The Quantity and the Quality of Party Systems: Party System Polarization, Its Measurement, and Its Consequences. Comparative Political Studies 41(7): 899–920.Google Scholar
Dancey, Logan, and Sheagley, Geoffrey. 2013. Heuristics Behaving Badly: Party Cues and Voter Knowledge. American Journal of Political Science 57(2): 312–325.Google Scholar
Danielian, Lucig H., and Page, Benjamin I.. 1994. The Heavenly Chorus: Interest Group Voices on TV News. American Journal of Political Science 38(4): 1056–1078.Google Scholar
De Cremer, David, and Tyler, Tom R.. 2007. The Effects of Trust and Procedural Fairness on Cooperation. Journal of Applied Psychology 92(3): 639–649.Google Scholar
Della Porta, Donatella, and Tarrow, Sidney G.. 2005. Transnational Protest and Global Activism. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar
Delli, Carpini, Michael X., and Keeter, Scott. 1996. What Americans Know about Politics and Why It Matters. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Dellmuth, Lisa. 2016. The Knowledge Gap in World Politics: Assessing the Sources of Citizen Awareness of the United Nations Security Council. Review of International Studies 42(2): 673–700.Google Scholar
Dellmuth, Lisa. 2018. Individual Sources of Legitimacy Beliefs: Theory and Data. In Legitimacy in Global Governance: Sources, Processes, and Consequences, edited by Tallberg, Jonas, Bäckstrand, Karin, and Scholte, Jan Aart, 37–55. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Dellmuth, Lisa, and Chalmers, Adam W.. 2018. All Spending Is Not Equal: European Union Public Spending, Policy Feedback and Citizens’ Support for the EU. European Journal of Political Research 57(1): 3–23.Google Scholar
Dellmuth, Lisa, and Schlipphak, Bernd. 2020. Legitimacy Beliefs towards Global Governance Institutions: A Research Agenda. Journal of European Public Policy 27(6): 931–943.Google Scholar
Dellmuth, Lisa, and Tallberg, Jonas. 2015. The Social Legitimacy of International Organisations: Interest Representation, Institutional Performance, and Confidence Extrapolation in the United Nations. Review of International Studies 41(3): 451–475.Google Scholar
Dellmuth, Lisa, Scholte, Jan Aart, and Tallberg, Jonas. 2019. Institutional Sources of Legitimacy for International Organisations: Beyond Procedure versus Performance. Review of International Studies 45(4): 627–646.Google Scholar
Dellmuth, Lisa, and Tallberg, Jonas. 2020. Why National and International Legitimacy Beliefs Are Linked: Social Trust as an Antecedent Factor. Review of International Organizations 15(2): 311–337.Google Scholar
Dellmuth, Lisa, and Tallberg, Jonas. 2021. Elite Communication and the Popular Legitimacy of International Organizations. British Journal of Political Science 51(3): 1292–1313.Google Scholar
Dellmuth, Lisa, Scholte, Jan Aart, Tallberg, Jonas, and Verhaegen, Soetkin. 2022a. The Elite-Citizen Gap in International Organization Legitimacy. American Political Science Review 116(1): 283–300.Google Scholar
Dellmuth, Lisa, Scholte, Jan Aart, Tallberg, Jonas, and Verhaegen, Soetkin. 2022b. Citizens, Elites, and the Legitimacy of Global Governance. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
De Vries, Catherine E. 2018. Euroscepticism and the Future of European Integration. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
De Vries, Catherine E., and Edwards, Erica E.. 2009. Taking Europe to Its Extremes: Extremist Parties and Public Euroscepticism. Party Politics 15(1): 5–28.Google Scholar
De Vries, Catherine E., and Hobolt, Sara B.. 2020. Political Entrepreneurs: The Rise of Challenger Parties in Europe. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
De Vries, Catherine E., Hobolt, Sara B., and Walter, Stefanie. 2021. Politicizing International Cooperation: The Mass Public, Political Entrepreneurs, and Political Opportunity Structures. International Organization 75 (2): 306–332.Google Scholar
De Wilde, Pieter, and Zürn, Michael. 2012. Can the Politicization of European Integration Be Reversed? Journal of Common Market Studies 50(S1): 137–153.Google Scholar
De Wilde, P. and Zürn, M. 2012. Can the Politicization of European Integration Be Reversed? JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies 50: 137–153.Google Scholar
Dewey, John. 1927. The Public and Its Problems. New York, NY: Henry Holt and Company.Google Scholar
Dingwerth, Klaus. 2014. Global Democracy and the Democratic Minimum: Why a Procedural Account Alone Is Insufficient. European Journal of International Relations 20(4): 1124–1147.Google Scholar
Dingwerth, Klaus, Witt, Antonia, Lehmann, Ina, Reichel, Ellen, and Weise, Tobias. 2019. International Organizations under Pressure: Legitimating Global Governance in Challenging Times. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dingwerth, Klaus, Schmidtke, Henning, and Weise, Tobias. 2020. The Rise of Democratic Legitimation: Why International Organizations Speak the Language of Democracy. European Journal of International Relations 26(3): 714–741.Google Scholar
Dohertly, David, and Wolak, Jennifer. 2012. When Do the Ends Justify the Means? Evaluating Procedural Fairness. Political Behavior 34(2): 301–323.Google Scholar
Dolan, Kathleen. 2011. Do Women and Men Know Different Things? Measuring Gender Differences in Political Knowledge. Journal of Politics 73(1): 97–107.Google Scholar
Dowling, John, and Pfeffer, Jeffrey. 1975. Organizational Legitimacy: Social Values and Organizational Behavior. The Pacific Sociological Review 18(1): 122–136.Google Scholar
Downs, Anthony. 1957. An Economic Theory of Democracy. New York, NY: Harper.Google Scholar
Drieskens, Edith, and Reykers, Yf. 2017. The Principal-Agent Model and Inter-organizational Relations. In Palgrave Handbook of Inter-Organizational Relations in World Politics, edited by Biermann, Rafael and Koops, Joachim A., 271–288. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Druckman, James N. 2001. On the Limits of Framing Effects: Who Can Frame? Journal of Politics 63(4): 1041–1066.Google Scholar
Druckman, James N. 2004. Political Preference Formation: Competition, Deliberation, and the (Ir)relevance of Framing Effects. American Political Science Review 98(4): 671–686.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Druckman, James N., and Leeper, Thomas J.. 2012. Learning More from Political Communication Experiments: Pretreatment and Its Effects. American Journal of Political Science 56(4): 875–896.Google Scholar
Druckman, James N., and Nelson, Kjersten R.. 2003. Framing and Deliberation: How Citizen Conversation Limits Elite Influence. American Journal of Political Science 47(4): 729–745.Google Scholar
Druckman, James N., Hennessy, Cari Lynn, Charles, Kristi St, and Webber, Jonathan. 2010. Competing Rhetoric over Time: Frames versus Cues. Journal of Politics 72(1): 136–148.Google Scholar
Druckman, James N., Peterson, Erik, and Slothuus, Rune. 2013. How Elite Partisan Polarization Affects Public Opinion Formation. American Political Science Review 107(1): 57–79.Google Scholar
Dür, Andreas, Marshall, David, and Bernhagen, Patrick. 2019. The Political Influence of Business in the European Union. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
Dür, Andreas, and Schlipphak, Bernd. 2021. Elite Cuing and Attitudes towards Trade Agreements: The Case of TTIP. European Political Science Review 13(1): 41–57.Google Scholar
Easton, David. 1965. A Systems Analysis of Political Life. New York: John Wiley.Google Scholar
Easton, David. 1975. A Re-assessment of the Concept of Political Support. British Journal of Political Science 5(4): 435–457.Google Scholar
Ecker-Ehrhardt, Matthias. 2016. Why Do Citizens Want the UN to Decide? Cosmopolitan Ideas, Particularism and Global Authority. International Political Science Review 37(1): 99–114.Google Scholar
Ecker-Ehrhardt, Matthias. 2018. Self-legitimation in the Face of Politicization: Why International Organizations Centralized Public Communication. Review of International Organizations 13(4): 519–546.Google Scholar
Edwards, Martin S. 2009. Public Support for the International Economic Organizations: Evidence from Developing Countries. Review of International Organizations 4(2): 185–209.Google Scholar
Esaiasson, Peter, Gilljam, Mikael, and Persson, Mikael. 2012. Which Decision-Making Arrangements Generate the Strongest Legitimacy Beliefs? Evidence from a Randomised Field Experiment. European Journal of Political Research 51(6): 785–808.Google Scholar
Esaiasson, Peter, Persson, Mikael, Gilljam, Mikael, and Lindholm, Torun. 2019. Reconsidering the Role of Procedures for Decision Acceptance. British Journal of Political Science 49(1): 291–314.Google Scholar
Evans, Jonathan. 2008. Dual-Processing Accounts of Reasoning, Judgment, and Social Cognition. Annual Review of Psychology 59(1): 255–278.Google Scholar
EVS. 2021. EVS Trend File 1981–2017. GESIS Data Archive, Cologne. ZA7503 Data file Version 2.0.0. DOI: 10.4232/1.13736Google Scholar
Finnemore, Martha. 1993. International Organizations as Teachers of Norms: The United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization and Science Policy. International Organization 47(4): 565–597.Google Scholar
Fischer, Frank. 1989. Technocracy and the Politics of Expertise. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Fiske, John. 2011. Introduction to Communication Studies. 3rd ed. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Fiske, Susan T., and Taylor, Shelley E.. 2017. Social Cognition: From Brains to Culture. 3rd ed. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Foster, Chase, and Frieden, Jeffry. 2017. Crisis of Trust: Socio-Economic Determinants of Europeans’ Confidence in Government. European Union Politics 18(4): 511–535.Google Scholar
Franck, Thomas M. 1990. The Power of Legitimacy among Nations. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Gabel, Matthew J. 1998. Economic Integration and Mass Politics: Market Liberalization and Public Attitudes in the European Union. American Journal of Political Science 42(3): 936–953.Google Scholar
Gabel, Matthew, and Scheve, Kenneth F.. 2007. Estimating the Effect of Elite Communication on Public Opinion Using Instrumental Variables. American Journal of Political Science 51(4): 1013–1028.Google Scholar
Gaines, Brian J., and Kuklinski, James H.. 2011. Treatment Effects. In Cambridge Handbook of Experimental Political Science, edited by Druckman, James N., Green, Donald P., and Lupia, Arthur, 445–458. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Gaines, Brian J., Kuklinski, James H., and Quirk, Paul J.. 2007. The Logic of the Survey Experiment Reexamined. Political Analysis 15(1): 1–20.Google Scholar
Gallup International Association. 2005. Voice of the People. ICPSR04636-v1. Zürich: Gallup International Association.Google Scholar
Gallup International Association. 2011. Voice of the People. ICPSR33504-v1. Zürich: Gallup International Association.Google Scholar
Gates, Bill. 2020. Halting funding for the World Health Organization during a world health crisis is as dangerous as it sounds. Their work is slowing the spread of COVID-19 and if that work is stopped no other organization can replace them. The world needs @WHO now more than ever. April 15, 2020, 7.17 PM. Tweet.Google Scholar
Gawrich, Andrea. 2006. Die EU-Minderheitenpolitik und die Erweiterungsprozesse. Zeitschrift für Politikwissenschaft 16(2): 487–504.Google Scholar
Ghassim, Farsan. 2022. The Effects of (De)legitimation on Citizens’ Legitimacy Beliefs about Global Governance: An International Survey Experiment. In Legitimation and Delegitimation in Global Governance: Practices, Justifications, and Audiences, edited by Bexell, Magdalena, Jönsson, Kristina, and Uhlin, Anders, 237–258. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Gibson, James L. 2008. Challenges to the Impartiality of State Supreme Courts: Legitimacy Theory and “New-Style” Judicial Campaigns. American Political Science Review 102(1): 59–75.Google Scholar
Gibson, James L., Caldeira, Gregory A., and Baird, Vanessa A.. 1998. On the Legitimacy of National High Courts. American Political Science Review 92(2): 343–358.Google Scholar
Gibson, James L., Caldeira, Gregory A., and Spence, Lester Kenyatta. 2003. Measuring Attitudes toward the United States Supreme Court. American Journal of Political Science 47(2): 354–367.Google Scholar
Gibson, James L., Caldeira, Gregory A., and Kenyatta Spence, Lester. 2005. Why Do People Accept Public Policies They Oppose? Testing Legitimacy Theory with a Survey-Based Experiment. Political Research Quarterly 58(2): 187–201.Google Scholar
Gigerenzer, Gerd. 2015. Risk Savvy: How to Make Good Decisions. New York: Penguin Books.Google Scholar
Gigerenzer, Gerd, and Brighton, Henry. 2009. Homo Heuristicus: Why Biased Minds Make Better Inferences. Topics in Cognitive Science 1(1): 107–143.Google Scholar
Gigerenzer, Gerd, and Gaissmaier, Wolfgang. 2011. Heuristic Decision Making. Annual Review of Psychology 62(1): 451–482.Google Scholar
Gill, Stephen, and Cutler, A. Claire, eds. 2014. New Constitutionalism and World Order. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Gilley, Bruce. 2006. The Meaning and Measure of State Legitimacy: Results for 72 Countries. European Journal of Political Research 45(3): 499–525.Google Scholar
Goren, Paul, Federico, Christopher M., and Kittilson, Miki Caul. 2009. Source Cues, Partisan Identities, and Political Value Expression. American Journal of Political Science 55(4): 805–820.Google Scholar
Gourevitch, Peter A., Lake, David A., and Stein, Janice G., eds. 2012. The Credibility of Transnational NGOs: When Virtue Is Not Enough. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Gregoratti, Catia, and Uhlin, Anders. 2018. Civil Society Protest and the (De)Legitimation of Global Governance Institutions. In Legitimacy in Global Governance: Sources, Processes, and Consequences, edited by Tallberg, Jonas, Bäckstrand, Karin, and Scholte, Jan Aart, 134–152. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Gregoratti, Catia, and Stappert, Nora. 2019. Future-Talk as a Practice of Legitimation? Paper presented at the International Studies Annual Convention, Toronto, March 27–30, 2019.Google Scholar
Gronau, Jennifer. 2015. Die Selbstlegitimation internationaler Institutionen: G8 und G20 im Vergleich. Frankfurt am Main: Campus Verlag.Google Scholar
Gronau, Jennifer, and Schmidtke, Henning. 2016. The Quest for Legitimacy in World Politics – International Institutions’ Legitimation Strategies. Review of International Studies 42(3): 535–557.Google Scholar
Guisinger, Alexandra, and Saunders, Elizabeth N.. 2017. Mapping the Boundaries of Elite Cues: How Elites Shape Mass Opinion across International Issues. International Studies Quarterly 61(2): 425–441.Google Scholar
Haas, Peter. 1992. Introduction: Epistemic Communities and International Policy Coordination. International Organization 46(1): 1–35.Google Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen. 1973/1976. Legitimation Crisis. London: Heinemann.Google Scholar
Hafner-Burton, Emilie M., Haggard, Stephan, Lake, David A., Victor, David G.. 2017. The Behavioural Revolution and International Relations. International Organization 71(S1): S1–S31.Google Scholar
Hainmueller, Jens, and Hiscox, Michael J.. 2007. Educated Preferences: Explaining Attitudes toward Immigration in Europe. International Organization 61(2): 399–442.Google Scholar
Hainmueller, Jens, Yamamoto, Teppei, and Hopkins, Daniel J.. 2014. Causal Inference in Conjoint Analysis: Understanding Multidimensional Choices via Stated Preference Experiments. Political Analysis 22(1): 1–30.Google Scholar
Hainmueller, Jens, Hangartner, Dominik, and Yamamoto, Teppei. 2015. Validating Vignette and Conjoint Survey Experiments against Real-World Behavior. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 112(8): 2395–2400.Google Scholar
Hall, Stephen G. F., Lenz, Tobias, and Obydenkova, Anastassia. 2021. Environmental Commitments and Rhetoric over the Pandemic Crisis: Social Media and Legitimation of the AIIB, the EAEU, and the EU. Post-Communist Economies Online First. DOI: 10.1080/14631377.2021.1954824.Google Scholar
Hamill, Ruth, Lodge, Milton, and Blake, Frederick. 1985. The Breadth, Depth, and Utility of Class, Partisan, and Ideological Schemata. American Journal of Political Science 29(4): 850–870.Google Scholar
Hardt, Heidi. 2014. Time to React: The Efficiency of International Organizations in Crisis Response. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Haerpfer, Christian, Inglehart, Ronald, Moreno, Alejandro, et al., eds. 2021. World Values Survey Time-Series (1981–2020) Cross-national Data-Set. Madrid, Spain & Vienna, Austria: JD Systems Institute & WVSA Secretariat. Data File Version 2.0.0, doi:10.14281/18241.15.Google Scholar
Harteveld, Eelco, Meer, Tom van der, and De Vries, Catherine E.. 2013. In Europe We Trust? Exploring Three Logics of Trust in the European Union. European Union Politics 14(4): 542–565.Google Scholar
Hawkins, Darren G., Lake, David A., Nielson, Daniel L., and Tierney, Michael J., eds. 2006. Delegation and Agency in International Organizations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Held, David. 1995. Democracy and the Global Order. From the Modern State to Cosmopolitan Governance. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Held, David, and Koenig-Archibugi, Mathias, eds. 2005. Global Governance and Public Accountability. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.Google Scholar
Helfer, Laurence R., and Schowalter, Anne E.. 2017. Opposing International Justice: Kenya’s Integrated Backlash Strategy against the ICC. iCourts Working Paper Series 83: 1–52.Google Scholar
Hellström, Johan. 2008. Who Leads, Who Follows? Re-Examining the Party-Electorate Linkages on European Integration. Journal of European Public Policy 15(8): 1127–1144.Google Scholar
Hetherington, Marc J. 2001. Resurgent Mass Partisanship: The Role of Elite Polarization. American Political Science Review 95(3): 619–631.Google Scholar
Hetherington, Marc J. 2005. Why Trust Matters: Declining Political Trust and the Demise of American Liberalism. New Jersey: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Hiscox, Michael J. 2006. Through a Glass and Darkly: Attitudes toward International Trade and the Curious Effects of Issue Framing. International Organization 60(3): 755–780.Google Scholar
Hicks, Raymond, Milner, Helen V., and Tingley, Dustin. 2014. Trade Policy, Economic Interests, and Party Politics in a Developing Country: The Political Economy of CAFTA-DR. International Studies Quarterly 58(1): 106–117.Google Scholar
Hix, Simon. 2008. What Is Wrong with the European Union and How to Fix It. London: Polity.Google Scholar
Hobolt, Sara B. 2007. Taking Cues on Europe? Voter Competence and Party Endorsements in Referendums on European Integration. European Journal of Political Research 46(2): 151–182.Google Scholar
Hobolt, Sara B. 2016. The Brexit Vote: A Divided Nation, A Divided Continent. Journal of European Public Policy 23(9): 1259–1277.Google Scholar
Hobolt, Sara B., and De Vries, Catherine. 2016. Public Support for European Integration. Annual Review of Political Science 19: 413–432.Google Scholar
Hooghe, Liesbet. 2002. The European Commission and the Integration of Europe: Images of Governance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hooghe, Liesbet, and Marks, Gary. 2005. Calculation, Community and Cues: Public Opinion on European Integration. European Union Politics 6(4): 419–443.Google Scholar
Hooghe, Liesbet, and Marks, Gary. 2009. A Postfunctionalist Theory of European Integration: From Permissive Consensus to Constraining Dissensus. British Journal of Political Science 39(1): 1–23.Google Scholar
Hooghe, Liesbet, and Marks, Gary. 2015. Delegation and Pooling in International Organizations. Review of International Organizations 10(3): 305–328.Google Scholar
Hooghe, Liesbet, and Marks, Gary. 2018. Cleavage Theory Meets Europe’s Crises: Lipset, Rokkan, and the Transnational Cleavage. Journal of European Public Policy 25(1): 109–135.Google Scholar
Hooghe, Liesbeth, Marks, Gary, and Wilson, Carole J.. 2002. Does Left/Right Structure Party Positions on European Integration? Comparative Political Studies 35(8): 965–989.Google Scholar
Hooghe, Liesbet, Marks, Gary, Lenz, Tobias, Bezuijen, Jeanine, Ceka, Besir, and Derderyan, Svet. 2017. Measuring International Authority: A Postfunctionalist Theory of Governance, Volume III. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hooghe, Liesbet, Lenz, Tobias, and Marks, Gary. 2019. Contested World Order: The Delegitimation of International Governance. Review of International Organizations 14(4): 731–743.Google Scholar
Hurd, Ian. 1999. Legitimacy and Authority in International Politics. International Organization 53(2): 379–408.Google Scholar
Hurd, Ian. 2007. After Anarchy: Legitimacy and Power in the United Nations Security Council. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Hurrelmann, Achim. 2007. Exploring the Communicative Dimension of Legitimacy: Text Analytical Approaches. In Legitimacy in an Age of Global Politics, edited by Schneider, Steffen, Nullmeier, Frank, and Hurrelmann, Achim, 125–155. Basingstoke: Palgrave.Google Scholar
Hurrelmann, Achim, and Schneider, Steffen, eds. 2015. The Legitimacy of Regional Integration in Europe and the Americas. Basingstoke: Palgrave.Google Scholar
Ikenberry, G. John. 2018. The End of Liberal International Order? International Affairs 94(1): 7–23.Google Scholar
Inglehart, Ronald, and Norris, Pippa. 2017. Trump and Populist-Authoritarian Parties: The Silent Revolution in Reverse. Perspectives on Politics 15(2): 443–454.Google Scholar
Inglehart, Ronald, and Welzel, Christian. 2005. Modernization, Cultural Change, and Democracy: The Human Development Sequence. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Isani, Mujtaba, and Schlipphak, Bernd. 2020. The Role of Societal Cues in Explaining Attitudes toward International Organizations: The Least Likely Case of Authoritarian Contexts. Political Research Exchange 2(1): 1771189.Google Scholar
Iyengar, Shanto. 1991. Is Anyone Responsible? How Television Frames Political Issues. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Jamal, Amaney, and Nooruddin, Irfan. 2010. The Democratic Utility of Trust: A Cross-national Analysis. Journal of Politics 72(1): 45.Google Scholar
Jessee, Stephen A. 2017. “Don’t Know” Responses, Personality, and the Measurement of Political Knowledge. Political Science Research and Methods 5(4): 711–731.Google Scholar
Joachim, Jutta. 2003. Framing Issues and Seizing Opportunities: The UN, NGOs, and Women’s Rights. International Studies Quarterly 47(2): 247–274.Google Scholar
Johnson, Tana. 2011. Guilt by Association: The Link between States’ Influence and the Legitimacy of Intergovernmental Organizations. Review of International Organizations 6(1): 57–84.Google Scholar
Jost, John T., Federico, Christopher M., and Napier, Jamie L.. 2013. Political Ideologies and Their Social Psychological Functions. In The Oxford Handbook on Political Ideologies, edited by Freeden, Michael and Stears, Marc, 232–250. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Kafura, Craig. 2019. Public and Opinion Leaders’ Views on US-China Trade War. Chicago, IL: The Chicago Council on Global Affairs and Lester Crown Center on US Foreign Policy.Google Scholar
Kahneman, Daniel. 2011. Thinking, Fast and Slow. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.Google Scholar
Kahneman, Daniel, and Tversky, Amos. 1979. Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk. Econometrica 47(2): 263–292.Google Scholar
Kahneman, Daniel, Slovic, Paul, and Tversky, Amos, eds. 1982. Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kalm, Sara, and Uhlin, Anders. 2015. Civil Society and the Governance of Development: Opposing Global Institutions. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Keck, Margaret, and Sikkink, Kathryn. 1998. Activists beyond Borders: Advocacy Networks in International Politics. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Kelley, Judith G, and Simmons, Beth Ann. 2015. Politics by Number: Indicators as Social Pressure in International Relations. American Journal of Political Science 59(1): 55–70.Google Scholar
Kentikelenis, Alexander, and Voeten, Erik. 2021. Legitimacy Challenges to the Liberal World Order: Evidence from United Nations Speeches, 1970–2018. Review of International Organizations 16: 721–754.Google Scholar
Keohane, Robert O. 1984. After Hegemony. Cooperation and Discord in the World Political Economy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Keohane, Robert O. 2006. The Contingent Legitimacy of Multilateralism. In Multilateralism under Challenge? Power, Institutional Order, and Structural Change, edited by Newman, Edward, Thakur, Ramesh, and Tirman, John, 56–76. Tokyo: United Nations University Press.Google Scholar
Keohane, Robert O., and Hoffmann, Stanley, eds. 1991. The New European Community: Desicionmaking and Institutional Change. Boulder: Westview Press.Google Scholar
Keohane, Robert O., Macedo, Stephen, and Moravcsik, Andrew. 2009. Democracy-Enhancing Multilateralism. International Organization 63(1): 1–31.Google Scholar
Kertzer, Joshua D., and Zeitzoff, Thomas. 2017. A Bottom-Up Theory of Public Opinion about Foreign Policy. American Journal of Political Science 61(3): 543–558.Google Scholar
Khan, Shamus Rahman. 2012. The Sociology of Elites. Annual Review of Sociology 38(1): 361–377.Google Scholar
King, Gary, Michael, Tomz, and Wittenberg, Jason. 2000. Making the Most of Statistical Analyses: Improving Interpretation and Presentation. American Journal of Political Science 44(2): 341–355.Google Scholar
Kriesi, Hanspeter. 2013. Democratic Legitimacy: Is There a Legitimacy Crisis in Contemporary Politics? Politische Vierteljahresschrift 54(4): 609–638.Google Scholar
Kriesi, Hanspeter, Edgar Grande, Romain Lachat, Dolezal, Martin, Bornschier, Simon, and Frey, Timotheos. 2006. Globalization and the Transformation of the National Political Space: Six European Countries. European Journal of Political Research 45(6): 921–956.Google Scholar
Kruck, Andreas, and Zangl, Bernhard. 2020. The Adjustment of International Institutions to Global Power Shifts: A Framework for Analysis. Global Policy 11(3): 5–16.Google Scholar
Kuklinski, James H. 2001. Citizen Competence Revisited. Political Behaviour 23(3): 195–198.Google Scholar
Kuklinski, James H., and Quirk, Paul J.. 2000. Reconsidering the Rational Public: Cognition, Heuristics, and Mass Opinion. In Elements of Reason: Cognition, Choice, and the Bounds of Rationality, edited by Lupia, Arthur, 153–182. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kuklinski, James H., and Quirk, Paul J.. 2001. Conceptual Foundations of Citizen Competence. Political Behavior 23(3): 285–311.Google Scholar
Kunda, Z. 1990. The Case for Motivated Reasoning. Psychological Bulletin 108(3): 480–499.Google Scholar
Lagarde, Christine. 2019. Wallet, Brain, Heart: Lagarde Reflecting on the IMF. YouTube: www.youtube.com/watch?v=mDUkAl04baU (last accessed June 16, 2022).Google Scholar
Lake, David A. 2009. Open Economy Politics: A Critical Review. Review of International Organizations 4: 219–244.Google Scholar
Lau, Richard R. 1985. Two Explanations for Negativity Effects in Political Behavior. American Journal of Political Science 29(1): 119–138.Google Scholar
Lau, Richard R., and Redlawsk, David P.. 2001. Advantages and Disadvantages of Cognitive Heuristics in Political Decision Making. American Journal of Political Science 45(4): 951–971.Google Scholar
Lavine, Howard, Johnston, Christopher, and Steenbergen, Marco. 2012. The Ambivalent Partisan. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Layne, Christopher. 2012. This Time It’s Real: The End of Unipolarity and the Pax Americana. International Studies Quarterly 56(1): 203–213.Google Scholar
Leeper, Thomas J., and Slothuus, Rune. 2014. Political Parties, Motivated Reasoning, and Public Opinion Formation. Political Psychology 35(1): 129–156.Google Scholar
Leeper, Thomas J., Hobolt, Sara B., and Tilley, James. 2020. Measuring Subgroup Preferences in Conjoint Experiments. Political Analysis 28(2): 207–221.Google Scholar
Lenz, Tobias, and Viola, Lora A.. 2017. Legitimacy and Institutional Change in International Organizations: A Cognitive Approach. Review of International Studies 43(5): 939–961.Google Scholar
Lenz, Tobias, Bezuijen, Jeanine, Hooghe, Liesbet, and Marks, Gary. 2015. Patterns of International Authority: Task Specific vs. General Purpose. Politischen Vierteljahresschrift 49: 131–156.Google Scholar
Lenz, Tobias, Schmidtke, Henning, Krösche, Niklas, and Schirmer, Swantje. 2020. Legitimation Communication of Regional Organizations: Conceptualization and Findings. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, September 9–13, 2020.Google Scholar
Levendusky, Matthew S. 2010. Clearer Cues, More Consistent Voters. Political Behavior 32(1): 111–131.Google Scholar
Levi, Margaret, Sacks, Audrey, and Tyler, Tom. 2009. Conceptualizing Legitimacy, Measuring Legitimating Beliefs. American Behavioral Scientist 53(3): 354–375.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lind, E. Allan, and Tyler, Tom R.. 1988. The Social Psychology of Procedural Justice. New York, NY: Plenum Press.Google Scholar
Lindberg, Leon N., and Scheingold, Stuart A.. 1970. Europe's Would-Be Polity. Patterns of Change in the European Community. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
Lodge, Milton, and Hamill, Ruth. 1986. A Partisan Schema for Political Information Processing. American Political Science Review 80(2): 505–520.Google Scholar
Lupia, Arthur. 1994. Shortcuts versus Encyclopedias: Information and Voting Behavior in California Insurance Reform Elections. The American Political Science Review 88(1): 63–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lupia, Arthur. 2000. Who Can Persuade Whom? Implications from the Nexus of Psychology and Rational Choice Theory. In Political Psychology, edited by Kuklinski, James H., 51–88. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Lupia, Arthur. 2016. Uninformed: Why People Seem to Know So Little about Politics and What We Can Do about It. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Lupia, Arthur, and McCubbins, Mathew D.. 1998. The Democratic Dilemma: Can Citizens Learn What They Need to Know? New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Lupu, Noam. 2015. Party Polarization and Mass Partisanship: A Comparative Perspective. Political Behavior 37: 331–356.Google Scholar
Macdonald, Terry. 2008. Global Stakeholder Democracy: Power and Representation beyond Liberal States. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Maier, Michaela, Adam, Silke, and Maier, Jürgen. 2012. The Impact of Identity and Economic Cues on Cititzens’ EU Support: An Experimental Study on the Effects of Party Communication in the Run-up to the 2009 European Parliament Elections. European Union Politics 13(4): 580–603.Google Scholar
Mair, Peter. 2007. Left-Right Orientations. In The Oxford Handbook of Political Behavior, edited by Dalton, Russel J. and Klingemann, Hans-Dieter, 206–222. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Majone, Giandomenico. 1998. Europe’s “Democratic Deficit”: The Question of Standards. European Law Journal 4(1): 5–28.Google Scholar
Maliniak, Daniel, Parajon, Eric, Peterson, Susan, and Powers, Ryan. 2019. Expert Endorsements, Partisan Cues, and Public Support for International Cooperation. Paper presented at the Workshop “Legitimacy in Global Governance,” University of Toronto, March 26, 2019.Google Scholar
Maliniak, Daniel, Parajon, Eric, and Powers, Ryan. 2021. Epistemic Communities and Public Support for the Paris Agreement on Climate Change. Political Research Quarterly 74(4): 866–881.Google Scholar
Mansfield, Edward D., and Mutz, Diana C.. 2009. Support for Free Trade: Self-Interest, Sociotropic Politics and Out-Group Anxiety. International Organization 63(3): 425–457.Google Scholar
Martin, Lisa L. 2000. Democratic Commitments: Legislatures and International Cooperation. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
McLaren, Lauren M. 2006. Identity, Interests and Attitudes to European Integration. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meissner, Katharina L. 2017. MERCOSUR. In Regional Integration in the Global South, edited by Krapohl, Sebastian, 147–178. Basingstoke: Palgrave.Google Scholar
Meyer, John W., and Richard Scott, W.. 1983. Organizational Environments: Ritual and Rationality. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Michel, Leo G. 2014. NATO Decision Making: The “Consensus Rule” Endures Despite Challenges. In NATO’s Post-Cold War Politics, edited by Mayer, Sebastian, 107–123. London: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Milgram, Stanley. 1974. Obedience to Authority: An Experimental View. New York, NY: Harper.Google Scholar
Miller, Joanne M., and Krosnick, Jon A.. 2000. News Media Impact on the Ingredients of Presidential Evaluations: Politically Knowledgeable Citizens Are Guided by a Trusted Source. American Journal of Political Science 44(2): 301–315.Google Scholar
Milner, Helen V. 1998. Rationalizing Politics: The Emerging Synthesis of International, American, and Comparative Politics. International Organization 52(4): 759–786.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mishler, William, and Rose, Richard. 2001. What Are the Origins of Political Trust? Testing Institutional and Cultural Theories in Post-communist Societies. Comparative Political Studies 34(1): 30–62.Google Scholar
Mondak, Jeffery. 1993. Public Opinion and Heuristic Processing of Source Cues. Political Behavior 15(2): 167–192.Google Scholar
Mondak, Jeffery. 1999. Reconsidering the Measurement of Political Knowledge. Political Analysis 8(1): 57–82.Google Scholar
Moravcsik, Andrew. 1998. The Choice for Europe: Social Purpose and State Power from Messina to Maastricht. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Morse, Julia C., and Keohane, Robert O.. 2014. Contested Multilateralism. Review of International Organizations 9(4): 385–412.Google Scholar
Mosca, Gaetono. 1939. The Ruling Class. 1st ed. New York, NY: McGraw Hill.Google Scholar
Muñoz, Jordi, Torcal, Mariano, and Bonet, Eduard. 2011. Institutional Trust and Multilevel Government in the European Union: Congruence or Compensation? European Union Politics 12(4): 551–574.Google Scholar
Mutz, Diana C. 2011. Population-Based Survey Experiments. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Newton, Kenneth, and Norris, Pippa. 2000. Confidence in Public Institutions: Faith, Culture or Performance? In Disaffected Democracies: What’s Troubling the Trilateral Countries?, edited by Pharr, Susan J. and Putnam, Robert D., 52–73. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Nguyen, Quynh, and Spilker, Gabriele. 2019. The Elephant in the Negotiation Room: PTAs through the Eyes of Citizens. In The Shifting Landscape of Global Trade Governance, edited by Elsig, Manfred, Hahn, Michael, and Spilker, Gabriele, 17–47. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Nicholson, Stephen P. 2012. Polarizing Cues. American Journal of Political Science 56(1): 52–66.Google Scholar
Nielson, Daniel L., Hyde, Susan D., and Kelley, Judith. 2019. The Elusive Sources of Legitimacy Beliefs: Civil Society Views of International Election Observers. Review of International Organizations 14(4): 685–715.Google Scholar
Nöel, Alain, and Thérien, Jean-Philippe. 2008. Left and Right in Global Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Norris, Pippa, ed. 1999. Critical Citizens: Global Support of Democratic Government. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Norris, Pippa. 2000. Global Governance & Cosmopolitan Citizens. In Governance in a Globalizing World, edited by Nye, Joseph S., and Donahue, John D., 155–177. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.Google Scholar
Norris, Pippa. 2009. Confidence in the United Nations: Cosmopolitan and Nationalistic Attitudes. In The International System, Democracy, and Values, edited by Esmer, Yilmaz, and Pettersson, Thorleif, 17–48. Uppsala: Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis.Google Scholar
Norris, Pippa. 2011. Democratic Deficit: Critical Citizens Revisited. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Norris, Pippa, and Inglehart, Ronald. 2019. Cultural Backlash: Trump, Brexit, and Authoritarian Populism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
NPR. 2019. U.S. Announces Its Withdrawal from the U.N. Human Rights Council. June 19, 2019. Internet: www.npr.org/2018/06/19/621435225/u-s-announces-its-withdrawal-from-u-n-s-human-rights-council (last accessed June 16, 2022).Google Scholar
Nujoma, Sam. 2002. Statement by His Excellency Dr Sam Nujoma President of the Republic of Namibia. Given at the OAU/AU Heads of State and Government Summit, Durban, July 9–12, 2002.Google Scholar
Nuñez-Mietz, Fernando G. 2018. Legalization and the Legitimation of the Use of Force: Revisiting Kosovo. International Organization 72(3): 725–757.Google Scholar
O’Brien, Robert, Goetz, Anne Marie, Scholte, Jan Aart, and Williams, Marc. 2000. Contesting Global Governance: Multilateral Economic Institutions and Global Social Movements. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Pallas, Christopher L. 2013. Transnational Civil Society and the World Bank: Investigating Civil Society’s Potential to Democratize Global Governance. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Parsons, Talcott. 1960. Structure and Process in Modern Societies. Glencoe, IL: Free Press.Google Scholar
Pateman, Carole. 1970. Participation and Democratic Theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Persson, Thomas, Parker, Charles F., and Widmalm, Sten. 2019. How Trust in EU Institutions Is Linked to Trust in National Institutions: Explaining Confidence in EU Governance among National-Level Public Officials. European Union Politics 20(4): 629–648.Google Scholar
Pevehouse, Jon C. 2005. Democracy from above: Regional Organizations and Democratization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Pew Research Center. 2014. Political Polarization in the American Public. Available at: www.pewresearch.org/politics/2014/06/12/political-polarization-in-theamerican-public/Google Scholar
Pew Research Center. 2019. Sizing Up Twitter Users. Internet: www.pewresearch.org/internet/2019/04/24/sizing-up-twitter-users/ (last accessed October 14, 2020).Google Scholar
Pfeffer, Jeffrey, and Salancik, Gerald. 1978. The External Control of Organizations: A Resource Dependence Perspective. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
Pitkin, Hannah F. 1972. The Concept of Representation. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Pogge, Thomas. 2002. World Poverty and Human Rights: Cosmopolitan Responsibilities and Reforms. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Putnam, Robert D. 1988. Diplomacy and Domestic Politics: The Logic of Two-Level Games. International Organization 42(3): 427–460.Google Scholar
Rathbun, Brian C. 2012. Trust in International Cooperation: International Security Institutions, Domestic Politics and American Multilateralism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Rauh, Christian, and Zürn, Michael. 2020. Authority, Politicization, and Alternative Justifications: Endogenous Legitimation Dynamics in Global Economic Governance. Review of International Political Economy 27(3): 583–611.Google Scholar
Reus-Smit, Christian. 2007. International Crises of Legitimacy. International Politics 44: 157–174.Google Scholar
Rittberger, Berthold, and Schroeder, Philipp. 2016. The Legitimacy of Regional Institutions. In Oxford Handbook of Comparative Regionalism, edited by Börzel, Tanja A. and Risse, Thomas, 579–599. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Rocabert, Jofre, Schimmelfennig, Frank, Crasnic, Loriana, and Winzen, Thomas. 2019. The Rise of International Parliamentary Institutions: Purpose and Legitimation. Review of International Organizations 14: 607–631.Google Scholar
Rodrik, Dani. 2018. Populism and the Economics of Globalization. Journal of International Business Policy 1(1–2): 12–33.Google Scholar
Rohrschneider, Robert, and Loveless, Matthew. 2010. Macro Salience: How Economic and Political Contexts Mediate Popular Evaluations of the Democracy Deficit in the European Union. Journal of Politics 72(4): 1029–1045.Google Scholar
Rokeach, Milton. 1968. Beliefs, Attitudes, and Values. San Francisco: Jossey- Bass.Google Scholar
Rubin, Donald B. 1976. Inference and Missing Data. Biometrika 63(3): 581–592.Google Scholar
Sánchez-Cuenca, Ignacio. 2000. The Political Basis of Support for European Integration. European Union Politics 1(2): 147–171.Google Scholar
Scharl, Arno, Hubmann-Haidvogel, Alexander, Weichselbraun, Albert, Lang, Heinz-Peter, and Sabou, Marta. 2013. Media Watch on Climate Change – Visual Analytics for Aggregating and Managing Environmental Knowledge from Online Sources. 46th Hawaii International Conference on Systems Sciences (HICSS-46). Sprague, R. H., 955–964. Maui, HI: IEEE Press.Google Scholar
Scharl, Arno, Föls, Michael, Herring, David, Piccolo, Lara, Fernandez, Miriam, and Alani, Harith. 2016. Application Design and Engagement Strategy of a Game with a Purpose for Climate Change Awareness. Internet Science, 3rd International Conference, INSCI-2016 (= Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 9934), edited by Bagnoli, F. et al., 97–104. Florence, Italy: Springer.Google Scholar
Scharl, Arno, Herring, David, Rafelsberger, Walter, Hubmann-Haidvogel, Alexander, Kamolov, Ruslan, Fischl, Daniel, Föls, Michael, and Weichselbraun, Albert. 2017. Semantic Systems and Visual Tools to Support Environmental Communication. IEEE Systems Journal 11(2): 762–771.Google Scholar
Scharpf, Fritz W. 1970. Demokratietheorie zwischen Utopie und Anpassung. Konstanz: Universitätsverlag.Google Scholar
Scharpf, Fritz W. 1999. Governing in Europe: Effective and Democratic? Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Scheve, Kenneth F., and Slaughter, Matthew J.. 2001. What Determines Individual Trade-Policy Preferences? Journal of International Economics 54(2): 267–292.Google Scholar
Schlipphak, Bernd. 2015. Measuring Attitudes toward Regional Organizations Outside Europe. Review of International Organizations 10(3): 351–375.Google Scholar
Schlipphak, Bernd, Schäfer, Constantin, and Treib, Oliver. 2021. Authority Matters: Institutional Settings, Cosmopolitanism, and the Public Legitimacy of International Organizations. Paper presented at the ISA Annual Convention, April 7, 2021.Google Scholar
Schmidt, Vivien A. 2012. Democracy and Legitimacy in the European Union Revisited: Input, Output and “Throughput.” Political Studies 61(1): 2–22.Google Scholar
Schmidtke, Henning. 2019. Elite Legitimation and Delegitimation of International Organizations in the Media: Patterns and Explanations. Review of International Organizations 14: 633–659.Google Scholar
Schmitt, Hermann, and Thomassen, Jacques. 1999. Political Representation and Legitimacy in the European Union. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Schneider, Christina J. 2019. The Responsive Union: National Elections and European Governance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Scholte, Jan Aart, ed. 2011. Building Global Democracy? Civil Society and Accountable Global Governance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Scholte, Jan Aart. 2018. Social Structure and Global Governance Legitimacy. In Legitimacy in Global Governance: Sources, Processes, and Consequences, edited by Tallberg, Jonas, Bäckstrand, Karin, and Scholte, Jan Aart, 75–97. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Scholte, Jan Aart, and Schnabel, Albrecht. 2003. Civil Society and Global Finance. London: Taylor and Francis.Google Scholar
Scholte, Jan Aart, and Tallberg, Jonas. 2018. Theorizing the Institutional Sources of Global Governance Legitimacy. In Legitimacy in Global Governance: Sources, Processes, and Consequences, edited by Tallberg, Jonas, Bäckstrand, Karin, and Scholte, Jan Aart, 56–74. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Scholte, Jan Aart, Verhaegen, Soetkin, and Tallberg, Jonas. 2021. Elite Attitudes and the Future of Global Governance. International Affairs 97(3): 861–886.Google Scholar
Scholte, Jan Aart, Fioramonti, Lorenzo, and Nhema, Alfred G., eds. 2016. New Rules for Global Justice: Structural Redistribution in the Global Economy. London: Rowman & Littlefield International.Google Scholar
Schumpeter, Joseph L. 1947. Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy. New York, NY: Harper & Brothers.Google Scholar
Scott, Richard. 1991. Unpacking Institutional Arguments. In The New Institutionalism in Organizational Analysis, edited by Walter, W. Powell and DiMaggio, Paul, 164–182. Chicago: Chicago University Press.Google Scholar
Shah, Anuj K., and Oppenheimer, Daniel M.. 2008. Heuristics Made Easy: An Effort-Reduction Framework. Psychological Bulletin 134(2): 207–222.Google Scholar
Simon, Herbert A. 1957. Models of Man: Social and Rational. New York, NY: Wiley.Google Scholar
Simon, Herbert A. 1982. Models of Bounded Rationality. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Skitka, Linda. 2002. Do the Means Always Justify the Ends or Do the Ends Sometimes Justify the Means? A Value Protection Model of Justice Reasoning. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 28(5): 588–597.Google Scholar
Slothuus, Rune, and De Vreese, Claes H.. 2010. Political Parties, Motivated Reasoning, and Issue Framing Effects. Journal of Politics 72(3): 630–645.Google Scholar
Sniderman, Paul M. 2000. Taking Sides: A Fixed Choice Theory of Political Reasoning. In Elements of Reason: Cognition, Choice, and the Bounds of Rationality, edited by Lupia, Arthur, McCubbins, Mathew D., and Popkin, Samuel L., 67–84. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Sniderman, Paul M. 2011. The Logic and Design of the Survey Experiment: An Autobiography of a Methodological Innovation. In Cambridge Handbook of Experimental Political Science, edited by Druckman, James M., Green, Donald P., Kuklinski, James H., and Lupia, Arthur, 102–114. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Sniderman, Paul M., and Bullock, John. 2004. A Consistency Theory of Public Opinion and Political Choice: The Hypothesis of Menu Dependence. In Studies in Public Opinion: Attitudes, Nonattitudes, Measurement Error, and Change, edited by Saris, Willem E., Sniderman, Paul M., 337–354. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Sniderman, Paul M., Hagen, Michael G., Tetlock, Philip E., and Brady, Henry E.. 1986. Reasoning Chains: Causal Models of Policy Reasoning in Mass Publics. British Journal of Political Science 16(4): 405–430.Google Scholar
Sniderman, Paul M., Brody, Richard A., and Tetlock, Philip E.. 1991. Reasoning and Choice: Explorations in Political Psychology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Solt, Frederick. 2008. Economic Inequality and Democratic Political Engagement. American Journal of Political Science 52(1): 48–60.Google Scholar
Sommerer, Thomas. 2016. Transnationale Zivilgesellschaft zwischen Dissidenz und Partizipation: Zum Zusammenhang von Protesten und der institutionellen Öffnung internationaler Organisationen. Zeitschrift für Internationale Beziehungen 23(2): 42–77.Google Scholar
Sommerer, Thomas, Agné, Hans, Zelli, Fariborz, and Bart, Bes. 2022. Global Legitimacy Crises: Decline and Revival in Multilateral Governance. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Soroka, Stuart N. 2006. Good News and Bad News: Asymmetric Responses to Economic Information. Journal of Politics 68(2): 372–385.Google Scholar
Spiegel International. 2010. Norway Takes Aim at G-20: “One of the Greatest Setbacks since World War II.” June 22, 2010. Internet: www.spiegel.de/international/europe/norway-takes-aim-at-g-20-one-of-the-greatest-setbacks-since-world-war-ii-a-702104.html (last accessed July 5, 2022).Google Scholar
Spilker, Gabriele, Nguyen, Quynh, and Bernauer, Thomas. 2020. Trading Arguments: Opinion Updating in the Context of International Trade Agreements. International Studies Quarterly 64(4): 929–938.Google Scholar
Stanovich, Keith E., and West, Richard F.. 2000. Individual Differences in Reasoning: Implications for the Rationality Debate? Behavioral and Brain Sciences 23(5): 645–664.Google Scholar
Steenbergen, Marco R., and Jones, Bradford S.. 2002. Modeling Multilevel Data Structures. American Journal of Political Science 46(1): 218–237.Google Scholar
Steenbergen, Marco, Edwards, Erica E., and de Vries, Catherine E.. 2007. Who’s Cueing Whom? Mass-Elite Linkages and the Future of European Integration. European Union Politics 8(1): 13–35.Google Scholar
Steffek, Jens. 2003. The Legitimation of International Governance: A Discourse Approach. European Journal of International Relations 9(2): 249–275.Google Scholar
Steffek, Jens, Kissling, Claudia, and Nanz, Patrizia, eds. 2007. Civil Society Participation in European and Global Governance: A Cure for the Democratic Deficit? Basingstoke: Palgrave.Google Scholar
Stephen, Matthew D, and Zürn, Michael, eds. 2019. Contested World Orders: Rising Powers, Non-governmental Organizations, and the Politics of Authority beyond the Nation-State. Oxford: Oxford University PressGoogle Scholar
Strebel, Michael A., Kübler, Daniel, and Marcinkowski, Frank. 2019. The Importance of Input and Output Legitimacy in Democratic Governance: Evidence from a Population-Based Survey Experiment in Four West European Countries. European Journal of Political Research 58: 488–513.Google Scholar
Suchman, Mark C. 1995. Managing Legitimacy: Strategic and Institutional Approaches. The Academy of Management Review 20(3): 571–610.Google Scholar
Symons, Jonathan. 2011. The Legitimation of International Organisations: Examining the Identity of the Communities that Grant Legitimacy. Review of International Studies 37(5): 2557–2583.Google Scholar
Söderbaum, Fredrik, Spandler, Kilian, and Pacciardi, Agnese. 2021. Contestations of the Liberal International Order. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taber, Charles S., and Lodge, Milton. 2006. Motivated Skepticism in the Evaluation of Political Beliefs. American Journal of Political Science 50(3): 755–769.Google Scholar
Tallberg, Jonas. 2002. Delegation to Supranational Institutions: Why, How, and with What Consequences? West European Politics 25(1): 23–46.Google Scholar
Tallberg, Jonas. 2016. Transparency. In The Oxford Handbook of International Organizations, edited by Cogan, Jacob K., Hurd, Ian, and Johnstone, Ian, 1170–1192. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Tallberg, Jonas. 2021. Legitimacy and Modes of Global Governance. In Global Governance in a World of Change, edited by Barnett, Michael N., Pevehouse, Jon C. W., and Raustiala, Kal, 311–337. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Tallberg, Jonas, and Verhaegen, Soetkin. 2020. The Legitimacy of International Institutions among Rising and Established Powers. Global Policy 11(3): 115–126.Google Scholar
Tallberg, Jonas, and Zürn, Michael. 2019. The Legitimacy and Legitimation of International Organizations: Introduction and Framework. Review of International Organizations 14: 581–606.Google Scholar
Tallberg, Jonas, Sommerer, Thomas, Squatrito, Theresa, and Jönsson, Christer. 2013. The Opening Up of International Organizations: Transnational Access in Global Governance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Tallberg, Jonas, Sommerer, Thomas, Squatrito, Theresa, and Lundgren, Magnus. 2016. The Performance of International Organizations: A Policy Output Approach. Journal of European Public Policy 23(7): 1077–1096.Google Scholar
Tallberg, Jonas, Bäckstrand, Karin, and Scholte, Jan Aart, eds. 2018. Legitimacy in Global Governance: Sources, Processes, and Consequences. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Tomz, Michael. 2007. Domestic Audience Costs and International Relations: An Experimental Approach. International Organization 61(3): 821–840.Google Scholar
Torcal, Mariano, Martini, Sergio, and Orriols, Lluis. 2018. Deciding about the Unknown: The Effect of Party and Ideological Cues on Forming Opinions about the European Union. European Union Politics 19(3): 502–523.Google Scholar
Tokhi, Alexandros. 2019. The Contestation of the IMF. In Contested World Orders: Rising Powers, Non-Governmental Organizations, and the Politics of Authority Beyond the Nation-State, edited by Stephen, Matthew and Zürn, Michael, 82–123. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Torgler, Benno. 2008. Trust in International Organizations: An Empirical Investigation Focusing on the United Nations. Review of International Organizations 3(1): 65–93.Google Scholar
Transue, John E., Lee, Daniel J., and Aldrich, John H.. 2009. Treatment Spillover Effects across Survey Experiments. Political Analysis 17(2): 143–161.Google Scholar
Tresch, Anke. 2009. Politicians in the Media: Determinants of Legislators’ Presence and Prominence in Swiss Newspapers. The International Journal of Press/Politics 14(1): 67–90.Google Scholar
Tversky, Amos, and Kahneman, Daniel. 1974. Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases. Science 185(4157): 1124–1131.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tversky, Amos, and Kahneman, Daniel. 1981. The Framing of Decisions and the Psychology of Choice. Science 211(4481): 453–458.Google Scholar
Tyler, Tom R. 1990. Why People Obey the Law: Procedural Justice, Legitimacy, and Compliance. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Tyler, Tom R. 2006. Psychological Perspectives on Legitimacy and Legitimation. Annual Review of Psychology 57: 375–400.Google Scholar
Tyler, Tom R., Boeckmann, Robert J., Smith, Heather J., and Huo, Yuen J.. 1997. Social Justice in a Diverse Society. Boulder: Westview Press.Google Scholar
Uhlin, Anders. 2019. Legitimacy Struggles in Global Governance: Legitimation and Delegitimation of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank. SAGE Open 9(3): 1–14.Google Scholar
Uhlin, Anders, and Gregoratti, Catia. 2022. The Interplay between Delegitimation and Legitimation: Civil Society Protest and the Responses of Global Governance Institutions. In Legitimation and Delegitimation in Global Governance: Practices, Justifications, and Audiences, edited by Bexell, Magdalena, Jönsson, Kristina, and Uhlin, Anders, 96–118. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
United Nations. 2019. Service and Sacrifice of African Peacekeepers “at the Forefront of Our Minds”: UN Chief. UN News (last accessed January 10, 2022).Google Scholar
United Nations. 2020. Protect Human Rights. Internet: www.un.org/en/our-work/protect-human-rights (last accessed June 27, 2022).Google Scholar
Velasco-Guachalla, V. Ximena, Calla, Hummel, Jami, Nelson-Nuñez, and Carew, Boulding. 2022. Legitimacy and Policy during Crises: Subnational COVID-19 Responses in Bolivia. Perspectives on Politics 20(2): 528–546.Google Scholar
Verhaegen, Soetkin, Aart, JanScholte, , and Tallberg, Jonas. 2021. Explaining Elite Perceptions of Legitimacy in Global Governance. European Journal of International Relations 27(2): 622–650.Google Scholar
Verhaegen, Soetkin, Dellmuth, Lisa, Scholte, Jan Aart, and Tallberg, Jonas. 2019. LegGov Elite Survey. Technical Report. Stockholm and Gothenburg: LegGov Research Program.Google Scholar
Voeten, Erik. 2013. Public Opinion and the Legitimacy of International Courts. Theoretical Inquiries in Law 14(2): 411–436.Google Scholar
Voeten, Erik. 2020. Populism and Backlashes against International Courts. Perspectives on Politics 18(2): 407–422.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Von Billerbeck, Sarah. 2020. “Mirror, Mirror on the Wall:” Self-legitimation by International Organizations. International Studies Quarterly 64(1): 207–219.Google Scholar
Walter, Stefanie. 2020. The Mass Politics of International Disintegration. CIS Working Paper No. 105. Zürich: Center for Comparative and International Studies.Google Scholar
Walter, Stefanie. 2021. The Backlash against Globalization. Annual Review of Political Science 24: 421–442.Google Scholar
Weatherford, M. Stephen. 1992. Measuring Political Legitimacy. American Political Science Review 86(1): 149–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weber, Max. 1922/1978. Economy and Society. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Weichselbraun, Albert, Gindl, Stefan, Fischer, Fabian, Vakulenko, Svitlana, and Scharl, Arno. 2017. Aspect-Based Extraction and Analysis of Affective Knowledge from Social Media Streams. IEEE Intelligent Systems 32(3): 80–88.Google Scholar
Weiss, Thomas G. 2012. What’s Wrong with the United Nations and How to Fix It. 2nd ed. Cambridge: Polity.Google Scholar
Westergren, Martin. 2016. The Political Legitimacy of Global Governance Institutions: A Justice-Based Account. PhD dissertation, Department of Political Science, Stockholm University.Google Scholar
Witt, Antonia. 2019. Between the Shadow of History and the “Union of People”: Legitimating the Organisation of African Unity and the African Union. In International Organizations under Pressure, edited by Dingwerth, Klaus, Witt, Antonia, Lehmann, Ina, Reichel, Ellen, and Weise, Tobias, 98–129. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zaller, John R. 1992. Nature and Origins of Mass Opinion. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Zaum, Dominik, ed. 2013. Legitimating International Organizations. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Zelli, Fariborz. 2018. Effects of Legitimacy Crises in Complex Global Governance. In Legitimacy in Global Governance: Sources, Processes, and Consequences, edited by Tallberg, Jonas, Bäckstrand, Karin, and Scholte, Jan Aart, 169–188. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Zvobgo, Kelebogile. 2019. Human Rights versus National Interests: Shifting US Public Attitudes on the International Criminal Court. International Studies Quarterly 63: 1065–1078.Google Scholar
Zürn, Michael. 2000. Democratic Governance beyond the Nation-State: The EU and Other International Institutions. European Journal of International Relations 6(2): 183–221.Google Scholar
Zürn, Michael. 2018. A Theory of Global Governance: Authority, Legitimacy, and Contestation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Zürn, Michael, Binder, Martin, and Ecker-Ehrhardt, Matthias. 2012. International Authority and Its Politicization. International Theory 4(1): 69–106.Google Scholar
Zürn, Michael, Dieter Wolf, Klaus, and Stephen, Matthew D.. 2019. Contested World Orders – Continuity or Change? In Contested World Orders: Rising Powers, Non-governmental Organizations, and the Politics of Authority beyond the Nation-State, edited by Stephen, Matthew D. and Zürn, Michael, 368–389. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Zürn, Michael, Tokhi, Alexandros, and Binder, Martin. 2021. The International Authority Database. Global Policy 12(4): 430–442.Google Scholar
Zürn, Michael, and Joerges, Christian, eds. 2005. Law and Governance in Postnational Europe: Compliance beyond the Nation-State. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×