Publications

Why do people like technocrats?

Jeanne Marlier, Matthias Kaltenegger and Laurenz Ennser-Jedenastik

European Journal of Political Research • 2025

Many voters support the inclusion of technocrats in government. Yet we know very little about why technocrats are considered more appealing than traditional party representatives. In particular, it is unclear which advantages and disadvantages voters attach to the defining traits of technocratic ministers: party independence and expertise. We engage with this question drawing on a pre-registered survey experiment in Austria. We examine how manipulating ministers' party affiliation and expertise affects voters' perceptions of their issue competence and bargaining competence. Findings indicate that voters ascribe lower levels of issue competence to partisan ministers than to non-partisan ministers, notwithstanding their actual expertise, and that ministers' partisanship shrinks the positive effect of expertise on perceived issue competence. However, this ‘partisanship penalty’ disappears for supporters of the minister's party. Moreover, voters perceive partisanship as an advantageous trait with regard to a minister's bargaining competence. While voters like technocrats for their expertise and independence from party politics, our findings reveal nuanced perceptions, with voters still recognizing distinct advantages in being represented by party politicians.

What ties a politician to a political party?

Oliver Huwyler, Jeanne Marlier, Florence Ecormier-Nocca, Manuel Wagner and Laurenz Ennser-Jedenastik

American Political Science Review

Redacted for peer review.

Is there a gender bias in voter reactions to political blunders? An experimental study

Jeanne Marlier, Sylvia Kritzinger and Julia Partheymüller

European Political Science Review

Redacted for peer review.

Raising standards? Citizen sanctions for corruption by independent and partisan ministers

Jeanne Marlier

Political Behavior

Redacted for peer review.

Does electoral accountability work when ministers are independent?

Jeanne Marlier

Journal of Elections, Public Opinion and Parties

Redacted for peer review.

The causal effect of independent candidacies on electoral participation: the French case

Jeanne Marlier

Independent candidates are seen as an obstacle to voter turnout due to higher information costs but may also mobilize citizens dissatisfied with traditional party politics. Causal evidence on their impact in the European context is lacking. This paper addresses this gap using a fuzzy regression discontinuity design on 10 French local and regional elections (1994–2020). First, I estimate the effect of the presence of independents on second round voter turnout. Second, I investigate how the effect differs by candidate and contest characteristics. The findings reveal that independent candidates can increase turnout only under specific conditions: they increase turnout in local elections and decrease blank votes when facing partisan opponents. However, they increase blank votes when they run as incumbents, face independent opponents or are pure independents. These findings suggest that independents expand voter choice, especially when they balance outsider status with sufficient informational clarity to avoid confusing a broader electorate.

Misperceptions of out-party tolerance for democratic norm violations before and after elections

Jeanne Marlier and Fernando Feitosa

Citizens frequently misperceive the political attitudes of their partisan opponents, yet little is known about how these misperceptions evolve in real-world electoral contexts or how they relate to key political outcomes. We address these gaps using original panel survey data collected before and after the 2024 Belgian federal election. We focus on misperceptions about the out-party's sense of understanding of democratic norm violations, specifically making verbal threats and spreading false information against political opponents. We find that misperceptions are more prevalent among more polarized individuals and those with greater exposure to political content on social media. Turning to electoral dynamics, misperceptions of out-party understanding of verbal threats increase after the election, while misperceptions about spreading false information remain stable. Electoral winners and losers diverge post-election, though the direction depends on the type of norm violation: winners drive increased misperceptions about verbal threats, while losers drive increased misperceptions about spreading false information. Post-election affective polarization and exposure to cross-cutting content are both positively associated with misperceptions on both outcomes. These findings underscore the importance of real-world electoral contexts for understanding when and why partisan misperceptions emerge and persist.

Technocrats, experts or outsiders? Which ministers parties select in times of crisis

Jeanne Marlier, Matthias Kaltenegger and Laurenz Ennser-Jedenastik

The technocracy literature often assumes that political parties appoint technocratic ministers primarily because their lack of affiliation with the nominating party helps to shift blame during challenging periods, such as political or economic crises. Yet, technocrats may also be selected for their expertise, to enhance public trust and to provide more effective policy solutions. Since the ministerial traits party independence and policy expertise are typically lumped together in one technocrat category in the existing literature, it remains unclear whether and under what conditions parties seek independence from party politics or specialized skills in their government personnel. To address this gap, we engage theoretically with the strategic value of outsider and expert ministers for political parties and develop hypotheses on how economic and political crises influence their appointment. Our empirical analysis employs fine-grained measures of the two defining traits of technocratic ministers, party outsiderness and expertise, drawing on comprehensive biographical data of ministers from six European democracies (Germany, France, Austria, Netherlands, Finland, Switzerland). This approach allows us to disentangle these dimensions and to better understand parties' specific strategic motivations driving such appointments in different situations. Results contribute novel perspectives on technocratic appointments and carry important implications for government legitimacy and accountability.