Parties, Candidates and Citizens On-Line - Åbo Akademi

normalization are given the coding value 1, and consequently the 0-value corresponds to
the conditions likelier to lead to findings of equalization.
The problem with dichotomization is, as mentioned, determining when a
condition is considered present (Peters 1998: 169-70). This problem is quite evident
concerning the election system. This variable is classified as present (coding value 1) if the
election system is considered to be mainly plurality, and not present (coding value 0) if the
election system is mainly proportional. Problems arise when considering mixed systems in
which elements of both plurality and proportional systems occur. In such cases, the
variable is coded according to the dominant type. In some countries, such as Germany,
Russia and the Ukraine, exactly 50% of the seats are selected using the plurality formula
and 50% using the proportional formula (Golder 2004). In these cases, the line between
plurality and proportional systems is based on how the two parallel systems interact. If the
two systems exist side by side without interconnecting mechanisms, as in Russia and the
Ukraine, they are coded as plurality systems 3. If the proportional system is used to correct
the outcome of the plurality system, as in Germany, the general election type is
considered to be proportional. This is because the proportional part has the slightly bigger
influence on the outcome of the election.
The second independent variable – history of democracy – is classified as not
present for countries in transition or with a democratic history shorter than 15 years (cf.
Norris 2004). For countries with a long history of their democratic status, the variable is
classified as present.
The third variable, country development in terms of both human and
technological development, is considered present only if both criteria are met. The
country must have both high human development according to its classification in the
United Nations’ human development index, and be technologically advanced at the point
in time analyzed in this article. The last criterion is based on the proportion of the
country’s population with Internet access. A country with over 30% of its population online
4 is considered technologically advanced. As noted by Norris (2001b: 53-4), Internet
usage is highly correlated to other forms of information infrastructure and can therefore
be used as a summarizing measure.
The fourth variable, the media environment, was earlier discussed as consisting of
both an off-line and an on-line dimension. In order for the variable to be considered
present, one of scenarios 2, 3 or 4, presented earlier in Figure 1 should be found. In
scenario 2, both the off-line and on-line media environment is restricted. In scenario 3,
the off-line media environment is unrestricted while the on-line equivalent is restricted. In
determining whether the on-line environment is restricted, I have taken both government
regulations and actual imposed sanctions into account. This explains why Singapore’s online
environment is considered restricted while Japan’s equivalent is not. As mentioned in
43