Write a 1500 word Mini Literature Review focusing on one lecture topic using at least 7 relevant academic journal articles (see the week-by-week cou

Write a 1500 word Mini Literature Review focusing on one lecture topic using at least 7 relevant academic journal articles (see the week-by-week course reading list for suggestions).

There is no need to develop a coherent argument - All you are expected to do is to provide an overview of existing 'strands' or approaches in the chosen field of study (i.e. one of the lecture topics).

The aim of this assignment is to encourage you to familiarize yourself with a more specific political psychology debate, one that you may want to deploy in the next assignment (the Current Affair Essay).

Produce a plan for your major essay 350 wordsNeed to choose a methods question where you can compare Foucault with Skinner

Introduction

M Sears, D.O. (1987) Political Psychology, Annual Review of Psychology, 38: 229-255 [Online]

Simon, H.A. (1985) Human Nature in Politics: The Dialogue of Psychology with Political Science, American Political Science Review, 79, 293-304. [Online]

M Carmines, E. G., & Huckfeldt, R. (1996). Political behavior: An overview. A new handbook of political science, 194-221 (Chapter 8). [Download]

Beyond Individual, Rational, Economic Self-Interest

Downs, A. (1957). An economic theory of political action in a democracy. Journal of political economy, 65(2), 135-150. [Online]

Simon, H. (1957). A behavioral model of rational choice. Models of man, social and rational: Mathematical essays on rational human behavior in a social setting, 241-260. [Download]

Akerlof, G. A. (1978). The market for lemons: Quality uncertainty and the market mechanism. In Uncertainty in economics (pp. 235-251). Academic Press. [Online]

Feldman, S. (1982). Economic self-interest and political behavior. American Journal of Political Science, 446-466. [Online]

Feldman, S. (1984). Economic self-interest and the vote: evidence and meaning. Political Behavior, 6(3), 229-251. [Download]

Simon, H. A. (1995). Rationality in political behavior. Political psychology, 45-61. [Online]

Simon, H. A. (2000). Bounded rationality in social science: Today and tomorrow. Mind & Society, 1(1), 25-39. [Online]

Dalton, R. J. (2000). Citizen attitudes and political behavior. Comparative political studies, 33(6-7), 912-940. [Online]

Akerlof, G. A., & Kranton, R. E. (2000). Economics and identity. Quarterly journal of Economics, 715-753. [Online]

Dalton, R. J., & Klingemann, H. D. (2007). Citizens and political behavior. Oxford handbook of political behavior. [Online]

McGann, A. (2016). Voting choice and rational choice. In Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Politics. [Online]

Shannon, B. N., McGee, Z. A., & Jones, B. D. (2019). Bounded rationality and cognitive limits in political decision making. In Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Politics. [Online]

Election Studies (Psephology)

Blumer, H. (1948). Public opinion and public opinion polling. American sociological review, 13(5), 542-549. [Online]

Downs, A. (1957). An economic theory of political action in a democracy. The journal of political economy, 135-150. [Online]

Agassi, J. (1960). Methodological individualism. The British journal of sociology, 11(3), 244-270. [Online]

Liska, A. E. (1974). Emergent issues in the attitude-behavior consistency controversy. American Sociological Review, 261-272. [Online]

Comanor, W. S. (1976). The median voter rule and the theory of political choice. Journal of Public Economics, 5(1), 169-177. [Online]

Sears, D. O., Lau, R. R., Tyler, T. R., & Allen, H. M. (1980). Self-interest vs. symbolic politics in policy attitudes and presidential voting. American Political Science Review, 74(03), 670-684. [Online]

Converse, P. E., & Pierce, R. (1985). Measuring partisanship. Political Methodology, 143-166. [Online]

Mughan, A. (1987). The hip pocket nerve and electoral volatility in Australia and Great Britain. Politics, 22(2), 66-75. [Online]

Kinder, D. R. (1998). Communication and opinion. Annual review of political science, 1(1), 167-197. [Online]

Visser, M. (1994). The psychology of voting action on the psychological origins of electoral research, 19391964. Journal of the History of the Behavioral Sciences, 30(1), 43-52. [Online]

Converse, P. E. (2006). The nature of belief systems in mass publics (1964). Critical Review, 18(1-3), 1-74. [Download]

Greene, S. (2004). Social identity theory and party identification. Social science quarterly, 85(1), 136-153.

Abramowitz, A. I., & Saunders, K. L. (2006). Exploring the bases of partisanship in the American electorate: Social identity vs. ideology. Political Research Quarterly, 59(2), 175-187.

Edlin, A., Gelman, A., & Kaplan, N. (2007). Voting as a rational choice: Why and how people vote to improve the well-being of others. Rationality and society, 19(3), 293-314. [Online]

List, C., & Spiekermann, K. (2013). Methodological individualism and holism in political science: A reconciliation. American Political Science Review, 107(4), 629-643. [Online]

Boonen, J. (2019). Learning who not to vote for: The role of parental socialization in the development of negative partisanship. Electoral Studies, 59, 109-119. [Online]

Huddy, L., Mason, L., & Aare, L. (2015). Expressive partisanship: Campaign involvement, political emotion, and partisan identity. American Political Science Review, 109(1), 1-17.

Druckman, J. N., & Levendusky, M. S. (2019). What do we measure when we measure affective polarization?. Public Opinion Quarterly, 83(1), 114-122. [Online]

Bankert, A. (2020). Partisan Identity and Political Decision Making. In Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Politics. [Online]

West, E. A., & Iyengar, S. (2020). Partisanship as a social identity: Implications for polarization. Political Behavior, 1-32.

Bankert, A. (2021). Negative and positive partisanship in the 2016 US presidential elections. Political Behavior, 43(4), 1467-1485.

Leadership and Followership

Titus, H. E., & Hollander, E. P. (1957). The California F scale in psychological research: 1950-1955. Psychological bulletin, 54(1), 47. [Online]

Stewart, D., & Hoult, T. (1959). A social-psychological theory of the authoritarian personality. American Journal of Sociology, 65(3), 274-279. [Online]

Samelson, F. (1986). Authoritarianism from Berlin to Berkeley: On social psychology and history. Journal of Social Issues, 42(1), 191-208. [Online]

Duckitt, J. (1989). Authoritarianism and group identification: A new view of an old construct.Political psychology, 63-84. [Online]

Zaller, J. (1990). Political awareness, elite opinion leadership, and the mass survey response. Social Cognition, 8(1), 125-153. [Online]

House, R. J., & Howell, J. M. (1992). Personality and charismatic leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 3(2), 81-108. [Online]

Altemeyer, B. & Hunsberger, B. (1992) Authoritarianism, religious fundamentalism, quest, and prejudice. The International Journal for the Psychology of Religion, 2(2) 113-133. [Online]

Baars, J., & Scheepers, P. (1993). Theoretical and methodological foundations of the authoritarian personality. Journal of the History of the Behavioral Sciences, 29(4), 345-353. [Online]

Smith, M. B. (1997). The Authoritarian Personality: A rereview 46 years later. Political Psychology, 18(1), 159-163. [Online]

Roiser, M., & Willig, C. (2002). The strange death of the authoritarian personality: 50 years of psychological and political debate. History of Human Sciences, 15(4), 71-96. [Online]

Altemeyer, B. (2004). Highly dominating, highly authoritarian personalities. The Journal of social psychology, 144(4), 421-448. [Online]

Hooghe, L., & Marks, G. (2005). Calculation, community and cues: Public opinion on European integration. European Union Politics, 6(4), 419-443. [Online]

Feldman, S., Huddy, L., & Marcus, G. E. (2012). Limits of Elite Influence on Public Opinion. Critical Review, 24(4), 489-503. [Online]

Zandonella, M., & Zeglovits, E. (2013). Young Men and their Vote for the Radical Right in Austria: Can Personality Traits, Right-wing Authoritarianism and Social Dominance Orientation Contribute to the Explanation of Radical Right Voting? PCSPolitics, Culture and Socialization, 3(1+ 2), 13-14. [Online]

Jonsson, S. (2013). After individuality: Freud's mass psychology and Weimar politics. New German Critique, 40(2), 53-75. [Online]

Duckitt, J. (2015). Authoritarian personality. International encyclopedia of the social & behavioral sciences, 2, 2. [Download]

Haslam, S. A., & Reicher, S. D. (2016). Rethinking the psychology of leadership: From personal identity to social identity. Daedalus, 145(3), 21-34. [Online]

Mols, F., Haslam, S.A., Platow, M.J., Reicher, S.D. & Steffens, N.K. (2023) The Social Identity Approach to Political Leadership. In L. Huddy, D. Sears, J. Levy, & J. Jerit (Eds.) Oxford Handbook of Political Psychology. OUP.

Ideology and Collective Action

Therborn, G. (1970). The Frankfurt School. New Left Review, 63, 65-96. [Online]

Jost, J. T., & Banaji, M. R. (1994). The role of stereotyping in system-justification and the production of false consciousness. British Journal of Social Psychology, 33, 1-1. [Online]

Pratto, F., Sidanius, J., Stallworth, L. M., & Malle, B. F. (1994). Social dominance orientation: A personality variable predicting social and political attitudes. Journal of personality and social psychology, 67(4), 741. [Online]

Brysk, A. (1995). " Hearts and minds": bringing symbolic politics back in. Polity, 27(4), 559-585. [Online]

Augoustinos, M. (1999). Ideology, false consciousness and psychology. Theory & Psychology, 9(3), 295-312. [Online]

Simon, B., & Klandermans, B. (2001). Politicized collective identity: A social psychological analysis. American Psychologist, 56(4), 319. [Online]

Sidanius, J., Pratto, F., Van Laar, C., & Levin, S. (2004). Social dominance theory: Its agenda and method. Political Psychology, 845-880. [Online]

OBrien, L. T., & Crandall, C. S. (2005). Perceiving self-interest: Power, ideology, and maintenance of the status quo. Social Justice Research, 18(1), 1-24. [Online]

Pratto, F., Sidanius, J., & Levin, S. (2006). Social dominance theory and the dynamics of intergroup relations: Taking stock and looking forward. European review of social psychology, 17(1), 271-320. [Online]

Jost, J. T., Becker, J., Osborne, D., & Badaan, V. (2017). Missing in (collective) action: Ideology, system justification, and the motivational antecedents of two types of protest behavior. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 26(2), 99-108. [Online]

Mikoajczak, G., & Becker, J. C. (2019). What is (un) fair? Political ideology and collective action. Journal of Social and Political Psychology, 7(2), 810-829. [Online]

Betz, H. G. (2017). Nativism across time and space. Swiss Political Science Review, 23(4), 335-353. [Online]

Bieber, F. (2020). Global nationalism in times of the COVID-19 pandemic. Nationalities Papers, 1-13. [Online]Personality, Cognition, or Group Dynamics?

Farnham, B. (1990). Political cognition and decision-making. Political Psychology, 83-111. [Online]

Mondak, J. J. (1993). Public opinion and heuristic processing of source cues. Political behavior, 15(2), 167-192. [Download]

Jones, B. D. (1999). Bounded rationality. Annual review of political science, 2(1), 297-321. [Online]

Lau, R. R., & Redlawsk, D. P. (2001). Advantages and disadvantages of cognitive heuristics in political decision making. American Journal of Political Science, 951-971. [Online]

Blais, A., & StVincent, S. L. (2011). Personality traits, political attitudes and the propensity to vote. European Journal of Political Research, 50(3), 395-417. [Online]

Chirumbolo, A., & Leone, L. (2010). Personality and politics: The role of the HEXACO model of personality in predicting ideology and voting. Personality and Individual Differences, 49(1), 43-48. [Online]

Caprara, G. V., Schwartz, S., Capanna, C., Vecchione, M., & Barbaranelli, C. (2006). Personality and politics: Values, traits, and political choice. Political psychology, 27(1), 1-28. [Online]

Schoen, H., & Schumann, S. (2007). Personality traits, partisan attitudes, and voting behavior. Evidence from Germany. Political psychology, 28(4), 471-498. [Online]

Huddy, L., & Bankert, A. (2017). Political partisanship as a social identity. In Oxford research encyclopedia of politics. [Online]

Huddy, L., Mason, L., & Aare, L. (2015). Expressive partisanship: Campaign involvement, political emotion, and partisan identity. American Political Science Review, 109(1), 1-17. [Online]

Greenaway, K. H., Wright, R. G., Willingham, J., Reynolds, K. J., & Haslam, S. A. (2015). Shared identity is key to effective communication. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 41(2), 171-182. [Online]

Steffens, N. K., Mols, F., Haslam, S. A., & Okimoto, T. G. (2016). True to what we stand for: Championing collective interests as a path to authentic leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 27(5), 726-744. [Online]

Reicher, S. D., & Haslam, S. A. (2017). How Trump won. Scientific American Mind, 28(2), 42-51. [Online]

Manners, I. (2018). Political psychology of European integration: The (re) production of identity and difference in the Brexit debate. Political Psychology, 39(6), 1213-1232. [Online]

Mols, F., Bell, J., & Head, B. (2020). Bridging the researchpolicy gap: the importance of effective identity leadership and shared commitment. Evidence & Policy: A Journal of Research, Debate and Practice, 16(1), 145-163. [Online]

Social Movements & Contentious Politics

Tilly, C. (1978). Studying social movements/studying collective action. [Download]

Habermas, J. (1981). New social movements. Telos, 1981(49), 33-37. [Download]

Cohen, J. L. (1985). Strategy or identity: New theoretical paradigms and contemporary social movements. Social research, 663-716. [Online]

d'Anieri, P., Ernst, C., & Kier, E. (1990). New social movements in historical perspective. Comparative Politics, 445-458. [Online]

Calhoun, C. (1993). "New social movements" of the early nineteenth century. Social Science History, 385-427. [Online]

Buechler, S. M. (1995). New social movement theories. Sociological Quarterly, 441-464. [Online]

Tarrow, S. (1996). Social movements in contentious politics: A review article. American Political Science Review, 90(04), 874-883. [Online]

McAdam, D., & Tarrow, S. (2000). Nonviolence as contentious interaction. PS: Political Science & Politics, 33(02), 149-154. [Online]

McAdam, D., Tarrow, S., & Tilly, C. (2003). Dynamics of contention. Social Movement Studies, 2(1), 99-102. [Download]

Edwards, G. (2004) Habermas and Social Movements: Whats New? Sociological Review, 52(1_suppl), 113-130. [Online]

Emirbayer, M., & Goldberg, C. A. (2005). Pragmatism, Bourdieu, and collective emotions in contentious politics. Theory and Society, 34(5-6), 469-518. [Online]

Pappas, T. S. (2008). Political leadership and the emergence of radical mass movements in democracy. Comparative Political Studies, 41(8), 1117-1140. [Online]

Tarrow, S. (2008). Charles Tilly and the practice of contentious politics. Social Movement Studies, 7(3), 225-246. [Online]

Victoroff, J. (2005). The Mind of the Terrorist A Review and Critique of Psychological Approaches. Journal of conflict resolution, 49(1), 3-42. [Online]

Explaining Genocide

Milgram, S. (1963). Behavioral study of obedience. The Journal of abnormal and social psychology, 67(4), 371. [Online]

Zimbardo, P. G. (1972). Comment: Pathology of imprisonment. Society, 9(6), 4-8.

Clarke, B. (1980). Beyond the banality of evil. British Journal of Political Science, 10(4), 417-439. [Online]

Whitfield, S. J. (1981). Hannah Arendt and the banality of evil. The History Teacher, 14(4), 469-477. [Online]

Blass, T. (1991). Understanding behavior in the Milgram obedience experiment: The role of personality, situations, and their interactions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60(3), 398. [Online]

Zimbardo, P. G., Maslach, C., & Haney, C. (2000). Reflections on the Stanford prison experiment: Genesis, transformations, consequences. Obedience to authority: Current perspectives on the Milgram paradigm, 193-237. [Download]

Whitfield, S. J. (1981). Hannah Arendt and the banality of evil. The History Teacher, 14(4), 469-477. [Online]

Reicher, S., & Haslam, S. A. (2006). Rethinking the psychology of tyranny: The BBC prison study. British Journal of Social Psychology, 45(1), 1. [Online]

Zimbardo, P. G. (2006). On rethinking the psychology of tyranny: The BBC prison study. British Journal of Social Psychology, 45(1), 47-53. [Online]

Haslam, S. A., & Reicher, S. (2007). Beyond the banality of evil: Three dynamics of an interactionist social psychology of tyranny. Personality and social psychology bulletin, 33(5), 615-622. [Online]

Reicher, S., Haslam, S. A., & Rath, R. (2008). Making a virtue of evil: A fivestep social identity model of the development of collective hate. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 2(3), 1313-1344. [Online]

Benjamin Jr, L. T., & Simpson, J. A. (2009). The power of the situation: The impact of Milgram's obedience studies on personality and social psychology. American Psychologist, 64(1), 12. [Online]

Reicher, S., & Haslam, S. A. (2011) After shock? Towards a social identity explanation of the Milgram obedience studies, British Journal of Social Psychology, 50(1), 163-169. [Online]

Haslam, S. A., & Reicher, S. D. (2012). Contesting the nature of conformity: What Milgram and Zimbardo's studies really show. PLoS Biol 10(11): e1001426. [Online]

Jetten, J., & Mols, F. (2014) 50: 50 hindsight: Appreciating anew the contributions of Milgram's obedience experiments. Journal of Social Issues, 70(3), 587-602. [Online]

Populism and The Wealth Paradox

Hovland, C. I., & Sears, R. R. (1940). Minor studies of aggression: VI. Correlation of lynchings with economic indices. The Journal of Psychology, 9(2), 301-310. [Download]

Sherif, M. (1956). Experiments in group conflict. Scientific American, 195(5), 54-59. [Online]

Grofman, B.N. & Muller, E.N. (1973) The strange case of relative gratification and potential for political violence: The V-curve hypothesis. American Political Science Review, 67(02), 514-539. [Online]

Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. The social psychology of intergroup relations, 33(47), 74. [Online]

Hamilton, R. F. (1984). Braunschweig 1932: Further evidence on the support for National Socialism. Central European History, 17(1), 336. [Online]

Koopmans, R. (1996). Explaining the rise of racist and extreme right violence in Western Europe: Grievances or opportunities? European Journal of Political Research, 30(2), 185-216. [Online]

Green, D. P., Glaser, J., & Rich, A. (1998). From lynching to gay bashing: the elusive connection between economic conditions and hate crime. Journal of personality and social psychology, 75(1), 82. [Online]

Ignazi, P. (1992). The silent counterrevolution. European Journal of Political Research, 22(1), 3-34. [Online]

Betz, H. G. (1993). The new politics of resentment: radical right-wing populist parties in Western Europe. Comparative Politics, 413-427. [Online]

OLoughlin, J., Flint, C., & Shin, M. (1995). Regions and milieux in Weimar Germany: The Nazi Party vote of 1930 in geographic perspective. Erdkunde, 49(4), 305314. [Online]

Guimond, S., & Dambrun, M. (2002). When prosperity breeds intergroup hostility: The effects of relative deprivation and relative gratification on prejudice. Personality and social psychology bulletin, 28(7), 900-912. [Online]

De Lange, S. L. (2007). A new winning formula? The programmatic appeal of the radical right. Party Politics, 13(4), 411-435. [Online]

Ivarsflaten, E. (2008) What unites right-wing populists in Western Europe? Re-examining grievance mobilization models in seven successful cases. Comparative Political Studies, 41(1), 3-23. [Online]

Mols, F., & Jetten, J. (2015). Explaining the Appeal of Populist RightWing Parties in Times of Economic Prosperity. Political Psychology. [Online]

Mudde, C. (2016). Europe's populist surge: A long time in the making. Foreign affairs, 95(6), 25-30. [Online]

Inglehart, R. F., & Norris, P. (2016). Trump, Brexit, and the rise of populism: Economic have-nots and cultural backlash. Harvard Kennedy School Working Paper RWP16-026.r. [Online]

Mols, F., & Jetten, J. (2020). Understanding support for populist radical right parties: toward a model that captures both demand-and supply-side factors. Frontiers in Communication, 5, 83. [Online]

Propaganda, Fake News & conspiracy beliefs

Bernays, E.L. (1947). The engineering of consent. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 250(1), 113-120. [Download]

Lasswell, H. D. (1950). Propaganda and mass insecurity. Psychiatry, 13(3), 283-299. [Online]

Goldstein, F. L., & Findley, B. F. (1996). Psychological operations: Principles and case studies. Air University Press, Maxwell Air Force Base, Alabama. [Online]

Herman, E. S. (2000). The propaganda model: A retrospective. Journalism Studies, 1(1), 101-112. [Online]

Lewandowsky, S., Stritzke, W. G., Oberauer, K., & Morales, M. (2005). Memory for fact, fiction, and misinformation: The Iraq War 2003. Psychological Science, 16(3), 190-195. [Online]

Taylor, P. M. (2007). Munitions of the mind: A brief history of military psychological operations. Place Branding and Public Diplomacy, 3(3), 196-204. [Online]

Comeforo, K. (2010). Review Essay: Manufacturing consent: The political economy of the mass media. Global Media and Communication, 6(2), 218-230. [Download]

Mullen, A., & Klaehn, J. (2010). The HermanChomsky propaganda model: A critical approach to analysing mass media behaviour. Sociology Compass, 4(4), 215-229. [Online]

Klaehn, J., & Mullen, A. (2010). The propaganda model and sociology: Understanding the media and society. Synesthesia: Communication Across Cultures, 1(1), 10-23. [Download]

Wood, M. J., Douglas, K. M., & Sutton, R. M. (2012). Dead and alive: Beliefs in contradictory conspiracy theories. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 3(6), 767-773. [Online]

Douglas, K. M., Sutton, R. M., & Cichocka, A. (2017). The psychology of conspiracy theories. Current directions in psychological science, 26(6), 538-542. [Online]

Lantian, A., Muller, D., Nurra, C., & Douglas, K. M. (2017). I know things they dont know! Social psychology. [Online]

Einstein, K. L., & Glick, D. M. (2013). Scandals, conspiracies and the vicious cycle of cynicism. In Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association. [Online]

Persily, N. (2017). The 2016 US Election: Can democracy survive the internet? Journal of democracy, 28(2), 63-76. [Online]

Lavigne, M. (2021). Strengthening ties: The influence of microtargeting on partisan attitudes and the vote. Party Politics, 27(5), 965-976. [Online]

Public Policy & Behaviour Change

Berkowitz, A. D. (2004). The social norms approach: Theory, research and annotated bibliography. Higher Education Center for Alcohol and Other Drug Abuse and Violence Prevention. US Department of Education. [Download]

Hausman, D. M., & Welch, B. (2010). Debate: To Nudge or Not to Nudge*. Journal of Political Philosophy, 18(1), 123-136. [Download]

Hritier, A. & Lehmkuhl, D. (2008). The shadow of hierarchy and new modes of governance. Journal of Public Policy 28(1): 117. [Online]

John, P., Smith, G., & Stoker, G. (2009). Nudge nudge, think think: two strategies for changing civic behaviour. The Political Quarterly, 80(3), 361-370. [Online]

Kotler, P. & Zaltman, G. (1971). Social marketing: An approach to planned social change. Journal of Marketing 36: 312. [Online]

Kooiman, J. (2002). Governance. A social-political perspective. In Participatory Governance (pp. 71-96). VS Verlag fr Sozialwissenschaften, Wiesbaden. [Online]

Wilkinson, T. M. (2013). Nudging and manipulation. Political Studies, 61(2), 341-355. (Online]

Mols, F., Haslam, S. A., Jetten, J., & Steffens, N. K. (2015). Why a nudge is not enough: A social identity critique of governance by stealth. European Journal of Political Research, 54(1), 81-98. [Online]

Sloane, B. C., & Zimmer, C. G. (1993). The power of peer health education. Journal of American College Health, 41(6), 241-245. [Online]

Tenbensel, T. (2005). Multiple modes of governance: disentangling the alternatives to hierarchies and markets. Public Management Review, 7(2), 267-288. [Online]

Sunstein, C. R., & Thaler, R. H. (2003). Libertarian paternalism is not an oxymoron. The University of Chicago Law Review, 1159-1202. [Online]

Treib, O., Bhr, H., & Falkner, G. (2007). Modes of governance: towards a conceptual clarification. Journal of European public policy, 14(1), 1-20. [Online]

Ewert, B., Loer, K., & Thomann, E. (2021). Beyond nudge: advancing the state-of-the-art of behavioural public policy and administration. Policy & Politics, 49(1), 3-23. [Online]

Revision Lecture