Replication Data for: The Electoral Implications of Legislative Candidate Selection Democratization

Amid declining public standing, many political parties seek to regain disaffected voters through various institutional strategies. One key approach is democratizing legislative candidate selection to grant party members or voters greater influence and signal improved responsiveness, transparency, and legitimacy. Yet does this strategy pay off electorally? The growing literature on this topic provides conflicting answers and limited evidence. We argue that more inclusive candidate selection does not have meaningful effects at the polls despite its merits. Whereas voters favor such procedures in principle, as some suggest, they underprioritize them in favor of other considerations when electing parties. We support this argument with observational and experimental data, including a matching difference-in-differences estimation of party performance across 34 democracies and a survey experiment in three countries. The paper contributes to our understanding of the relationship between party institutions and voter behavior in an age of eroding public trust and rising anti-establishment sentiment.在公众认可度持续下滑的背景下，诸多政党试图通过各类制度性策略重新争取心怀不满的选民。其中一项核心策略便是推动立法候选人遴选民主化，赋予党员或选民更大话语权，以此彰显政党在回应性、透明度与合法性层面的提升。但这一策略能否在选举中取得成效？当前围绕该主题的研究文献层出不穷，但结论彼此相悖，且相关实证证据较为有限。我们的核心论点是：尽管遴选机制更具包容性具备诸多优势，但该机制并不会对选举结果产生实质影响。正如部分研究所言，选民虽在原则上支持此类遴选程序，但在投票支持政党时，却会将其置于次要位置，转而优先考量其他因素。我们依托观测数据与实验数据验证了该论点，其中包括针对34个民主国家的政党选举表现开展的匹配双重差分估计，以及在3个国家进行的调查实验。在公众信任不断受损、反建制情绪日益抬头的时代背景下，本研究有助于深化我们对政党制度与选民行为之间关联的认知。