Political Representation - JPM793

• Anglický název: Political Representation
• Zajišťuje: Katedra politologie (23-KP)
• Fakulta: Fakulta sociálních věd
• Platnost: od 2024
• Semestr: letní
• E-Kredity: 6
• Způsob provedení zkoušky: letní s.:
• Rozsah, examinace: letní s.:1/2, Zk [HT]
• Počet míst: 20 / neomezen (20)
• Minimální obsazenost: neomezen
• 4EU+: ne
• Virtuální mobilita / počet míst pro virtuální mobilitu: ne
• Stav předmětu: vyučován
• Jazyk výuky: angličtina
• Způsob výuky: prezenční
• Další informace: https://cuni-cz.zoom.us/j/97467769990?pwd=bXoxb1NocEpXRWpTYzdvcEpacWt5UT09 Meeting ID: 974 6776 9990 Passcode: 317284
• Poznámka: předmět je možno zapsat mimo plán; povolen pro zápis po webu
• Garant: doc. Dr. habil. MA PhDr. Petra Guasti, Ph.D.
• Vyučující: doc. Dr. habil. MA PhDr. Petra Guasti, Ph.D.
• Třída: Courses for incoming students

Anotace

COURSE DESCRIPTION:
The traditional theory of democratic representation centres on the linkage between democracy and representation. It answers the question of what makes representation democratic with two interlinked concepts – authorization and accountability. At the heart of democratic representation are elections – they are both an authorization mechanism (represented appoint representatives) and providing accountability (represented re-appoint 'good' representatives and punish the 'bad' ones). Historically, the representation literature focused on the representative's behaviour (delegate vs trustee model), types of representation, and methods for selecting representatives. Recent theories of representation broadened the scope of the represented (to include both people and discourses) and the role of the representative (citizen representative). The scholars of the representative turn went further, highlighting multiple forms and mechanisms of representation beyond elections rejecting the principle-agent relationship, introducing reflexivity as a measure of legitimacy, and reconsidering representation as mediation centred on voice, trust, and memory or as advocacy. They shifted our attention from the formal election procedure to the expressive and performative dimension of representation. Constructivist democratic theorists reconsidered what representation is and the relationship between the representative and the represented. The British political theorist Michael Saward reconceptualized representation as a claim-making process, broadening the scope of representation (actors and procedures) beyond elected representatives and elections. The concept of representation as claim-making bridges representation, participation, and deliberation. Representation as claim-making focuses on the plurality of claim-makers, claims, and conditions under which claim-making occurs. Claim-making is at the core of the constructivist turn in political representation. This course is designed to provide an in-depth overview of the evolution of political representation – from the traditional through modern to the contemporary constructivist turn. We will discuss the key dimensions of representation – accountability, authorization, substantive vs descriptive representation, and responsibility vs responsiveness. In addition, the students will familiarize themselves with key texts. In class, the discussion will enable a comprehensive understanding of the key feature of contemporary democracy – the linkage between the representatives and the represented.

Poslední úprava: Guasti Petra, doc. Dr. habil. MA PhDr., Ph.D. (21.01.2025)

Cíl předmětu

LEARNING OUTCOMES:

The seminar combines active and passive, individual and group learning forms, and is designed to develop:

1. Knowledge and understanding of political representation – key theories and concepts; 
2. Information processing skills and analytical skills - students should be able to understand how representation functions. Key is the linkage between the representatives and the represented; 
3. communication skills – students will improve their communication and argumentation skills discussing various issues – developing ways to debate using theoretically informed and factual arguments; 
4. writing skills – in the course of the semester, students will improve the ability to summarize academic texts, identify and elaborate on the key points, and work with resources according to academic standards (i.e., proper citation of various types of texts, including online resources).

 

Poslední úprava: Guasti Petra, doc. Dr. habil. MA PhDr., Ph.D. (21.01.2025)

Deskriptory

Lecturer: Associate Professor Petra Guasti

E-Mail: [e-mail]

Times & Room: Tuesdays 14:00-15:30  B316

Credits: 6

Language: English

 

Poslední úprava: Guasti Petra, doc. Dr. habil. MA PhDr., Ph.D. (21.01.2025)

Literatura

 

See SYLLABUS! + 

Additional readings:

Andeweg, Rudy B., and Jacques J.A. Thomassen, 2005. “Modes of Political Representation: Toward a new typology,” Legislative Studies Quarterly, 30(4): 507–528.

Mansbridge, J. (2005). Quota problems: Combating the dangers of essentialism. Politics & Gender, 1(4), 622.

Rehfeld, A. 2006. “Towards a General Theory of Political Representation,” The Journal of Politics, 68: 1–21.

Runciman, David, 2007. “The Paradox of Political Representation,” Journal of Political Philosophy, 15: 93–114.

Saward, Michael, 2014. "Shape-shifting representation." American Political Science Review, 108(4): 723–736.

–––, 2010—the Representative Claim, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

–––, 2008. "Representation and democracy: revisions and possibilities," Sociology Compass, 2(3): 1000–1013.

Vieira, Monica and David Runciman, 2008. Representation, Cambridge: Polity Press.

Vieira, Monica (ed.), 2017. Reclaiming Representation: Contemporary Advances in the Theory of Political Representation, New York: Routledge Press.

Warren, Mark and Dario Castiglione, 2004. “The Transformation of Democratic Representation,” Democracy and Society, 2(1): 5–22.

 

Critic of Representation

Dryzek, John, 1996. “Political Inclusion and the Dynamics of Democratization,” American Political Science Review, 90 (September): 475–487.

Pateman, Carole, 1970. Participation and Democratic Theory, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Rousseau, Jean Jacques, 1762, The Social Contract, Judith Masters and Roger Masters (trans.), New York: St. Martins Press, 1978.

Saward, Michael, 2008. “Representation and Democracy: Revisions and Possibilities,” Sociology Compass, 2: 1000–1013.

 

Democratic Representation

Caramani (2017) Will Versus Reason: The Populist and Technocratic Challenge to the Party Model of Political Representation. American Political Science Review 111(1): 1‒14.

Caramani, Daniele, Celis, Karen, and Bram Wauters (2014). "The Representation of Old and New Groups." In Deschouwer, Kris and Sam Depauw (eds.), Representing the People: A Survey of Members of Statewide and Sub-State Parliaments. Oxford: Oxford University Press (Chapter 3).

Castiglione, D., 2015. "Trajectories and Transformations of the Democratic Representative System." Global Policy, 6(S1): 8–16.

Dalton, Russell J. (1985). Political Parties and Political Representation: Party Supporters and Party Elites in Nine Nations. Comparative Political Studies 18(3): 267‒99.

Disch, Lisa, 2011. "Toward a Mobilization Conception of Democratic Representation," American Political Science Review, 105(1): 100–114.

–––, 2012. “Democratic representation and the constituency paradox,” Perspectives on Politics, 10(3): 599–616.

Dovi, Suzanne, 2007. The Good Representative, New York: Wiley-Blackwell Publishing.

–––, 2016. "Hanna Pitkin, The Concept of Representation," The Oxford Handbook of Classics in Contemporary Political Theory, Jacob Levy (ed.), Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI: 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198717133.013.24

Näsström, Sofia, 2006. “Representative democracy as tautology: Ankersmit and Lefort on representation,” European Journal of Political Theory, 5(3): 321–342.

Önnudóttir, E. H. (2014). Policy congruence and style of representation: Party voters and political parties. West European Politics, 37(3), 538-563.

Saward, Michael, 2008. “Representation and Democracy: Revisions and Possibilities,” Sociology Compass, 2: 1000–1013.

Urbinati, Nadia, 2011. “Political Representation as Democratic Process,” Redescriptions (Yearbook of Political Thought and Conceptual History: Volume 10), Kari Palonen (ed.), Helsinki: Transaction Publishers.

Poslední úprava: Guasti Petra, doc. Dr. habil. MA PhDr., Ph.D. (21.01.2025)

Požadavky ke zkoušce

COURSE REQUIREMENTS:

The communication platform for this seminar will be Moodle, where all readings will be available. 

Required readings are to be completed by every student for the seminar session BEFORE the class. The recommended reading aims to encourage students to obtain a more profound understanding of the presented topics and serve as a basis for student presentations.

Students are also encouraged to use the library and other resources available at the university. You are welcome to ask for a recommendation in a specific direction during consultations.

 

1. Active course participation is a requirement for the successful completion of the course. However, there is a difference between presence and active participation. Active participation means active engagement (commenting, discussing with peers, asking meaningful questions). 

 

1. Presentation: Students will hold shared presentations on recommended literature depending on the number of participants. The presentation will take 15-20 minutes and cover key aspects and the article(s). In addition, the group will present several questions for discussion based on the reading (minimum one question per group member). The presentations are to be submitted electronically via the Moodle platform as PDF the latest 24 hours before the relevant session, to be checked by the lecturer.

 

1. Written assignment: Students must write a short paper on the topic of their choice selected from the course themes. (Times New Roman, font size 10-12, minimum 2000 words, maximum 3000 words – inducing literature and footnotes). This paper is to be submitted via the Moodle platform at the latest 15.5.2025.  

 

The idea behind these assignments is that you familiarize yourself with many different questions and issues at the forefront of measuring democratic quality. This should train students to think along theoretical lines and allow them to see democracy from a theoretically- and empirically-informed perspective, and enable them to write a term paper if they choose so.

 

PLAGIARISM AND ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE

Plagiarism is the unacknowledged use of someone else’s work as your own, even if unintentional. It can involve copying text, paraphrasing without citing the source, undisclosed collaboration with others, or using AI. To avoid plagiarism, students must always properly cite their sources, mark quotations, and acknowledge contributions from others and AI. The responsibility always lies with the student—if you work with AI and plagiarism is found, it is considered your plagiarism. (AI is a language model that generates text for you from other texts.)

 

To detect plagiarism, FSV UK uses Turnitin, which is automatically integrated into Moodle, and I also privately use Copyleaks. Both tools can identify plagiarism and AI generated texts.

 

Plagiarism and unacknowledged AI use are reported, investigated and have serious consequences as per Dean’s provision 18/2015. https://fsv.cuni.cz/en/deans-provision-no-18/2015  

 

CONSULTATIONS: 

The students are encouraged to approach me individually if they need assistance with any aspect of the course, course readings, and course requirements.  Consultations will take place via book AND email confirmed consultation via the Konzultace platform.

Poslední úprava: Guasti Petra, doc. Dr. habil. MA PhDr., Ph.D. (21.01.2025)

Sylabus

JPM793 Political Representation
Summer Semester 2025

Lecturer: Associate Professor Petra Guasti
E-Mail: [e-mail]
Times & Room: Tuesdays 14:00 – 15:20 B316
Credits: 6
Language: English
PLEASE NOTE: No class on May 13, 2025 – Rector’s Day!

COURSE DESCRIPTION:
The traditional theory of democratic representation centres on the linkage between democracy and representation. It answers the question of what makes representation democratic with two interlinked concepts – authorization and accountability. At the heart of democratic representation are elections – they are both an authorization mechanism (represented appoint representatives) and providing accountability (represented re-appoint 'good' representatives and punish the 'bad' ones). Historically, the representation literature focused on the representative's behaviour (delegate vs trustee model), types of representation, and methods for selecting representatives. Recent theories of representation broadened the scope of the represented (to include both people and discourses) and the role of the representative (citizen representative). The scholars of the representative turn went further, highlighting multiple forms and mechanisms of representation beyond elections rejecting the principle-agent relationship, introducing reflexivity as a measure of legitimacy, and reconsidering representation as mediation centred on voice, trust, and memory or as advocacy. They shifted our attention from the formal election procedure to the expressive and performative dimension of representation. Constructivist democratic theorists reconsidered what representation is and the relationship between the representative and the represented. The British political theorist Michael Saward reconceptualized representation as a claim-making process, broadening the scope of representation (actors and procedures) beyond elected representatives and elections. The concept of representation as claim-making bridges representation, participation, and deliberation. Representation as claim-making focuses on the plurality of claim-makers, claims, and conditions under which claim-making occurs. Claim-making is at the core of the constructivist turn in political representation. This course is designed to provide an in-depth overview of the evolution of political representation – from the traditional through modern to the contemporary constructivist turn. We will discuss the key dimensions of representation – accountability, authorization, substantive vs descriptive representation, and responsibility vs responsiveness. In addition, the students will familiarize themselves with key texts. In class, the discussion will enable a comprehensive understanding of the key feature of contemporary democracy – the linkage between the representatives and the represented.

LEARNING OUTCOMES:
The seminar combines active and passive, individual and group learning forms, and is designed to develop:
1. Knowledge and understanding of political representation – key theories and concepts;
2. Information processing skills and analytical skills - students should be able to understand how representation functions. Key is the linkage between the representatives and the represented;
3. communication skills – students will improve their communication and argumentation skills discussing various issues – developing ways to debate using theoretically informed and factual arguments;
4. writing skills – in the course of the semester, students will improve the ability to summarize academic texts, identify and elaborate on the key points, and work with resources according to academic standards (i.e., proper citation of various types of texts, including online resources).

COURSE REQUIREMENTS:
The communication platform for this seminar will be Moodle, where all readings will be available.
Required readings are to be completed by every student for the seminar session BEFORE the class. The recommended reading aims to encourage students to obtain a more profound understanding of the presented topics and serve as a basis for student presentations.
Students are also encouraged to use the library and other resources available at the university. You are welcome to ask for a recommendation in a specific direction during consultations.

1. Active course participation is a requirement for the successful completion of the course. However, there is a difference between presence and active participation. Active participation means active engagement (commenting, discussing with peers, asking meaningful questions).

2. Presentation: Students will hold shared presentations on recommended literature depending on the number of participants. The presentation will take 15-20 minutes and cover key aspects and the article(s). In addition, the group will present several questions for discussion based on the reading (minimum one question per group member). The presentations are to be submitted electronically via the Moodle platform as PDF the latest 24 hours before the relevant session, to be checked by the lecturer.

3. Written assignment: Students must write a short paper on the topic of their choice selected from the course themes. (Times New Roman, font size 10-12, minimum 2000 words, maximum 3000 words – inducing literature and footnotes). This paper is to be submitted via the Moodle platform at the latest 15.5.2025.

The idea behind these assignments is that you familiarize yourself with many different questions and issues at the forefront of measuring democratic quality. This should train students to think along theoretical lines and allow them to see democracy from a theoretically- and empirically-informed perspective, and enable them to write a term paper if they choose so.

PLAGIARISM AND ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE
Plagiarism is the unacknowledged use of someone else’s work as your own, even if unintentional. It can involve copying text, paraphrasing without citing the source, undisclosed collaboration with others, or using AI. To avoid plagiarism, students must always properly cite their sources, mark quotations, and acknowledge contributions from others and AI. The responsibility always lies with the student—if you work with AI and plagiarism is found, it is considered your plagiarism. (AI is a language model that generates text for you from other texts.)

To detect plagiarism, FSV UK uses Turnitin, which is automatically integrated into Moodle, and I also privately use Copyleaks. Both tools can identify plagiarism and AI generated texts.

Plagiarism and unacknowledged AI use are reported, investigated and have serious consequences as per Dean’s provision 18/2015. https://fsv.cuni.cz/en/deans-provision-no-18/2015

CONSULTATIONS:
The students are encouraged to approach me individually if they need assistance with any aspect of the course, course readings, and course requirements. Consultations will take place via book AND email confirmed consultation via the Konzultace platform.
 

BLOCK I. POLITICAL REPRESENTATION: HISTORICAL ROOTS AND KEY COMPONENTS
Session Date Topic
1. 18.2.2025 Introduction
Course Overview
Course Requirements

Recommended reading:
*Urbinati, Nadia and Mark Warren, 2008. “The Concept of Representation in Contemporary Democratic Theory,” Annual Review of Political Science, 11: 387–412.
*Dario Castiglione and Mark Warren, “Rethinking Representation: Eight Theoretical Issues” (paper, Conference on Rethinking Democratic Representation, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, 2006)

2. 25.2.2025 What is Representation?

Required reading:
*Russo, F., & Cotta, M. (2020). Political representation: concepts, theories and practices in historical perspective. In Research Handbook on Political Representation. Edward Elgar Publishing.

Recommended reading:
*Mansbridge, Jane (2011). Clarifying the Concept of Representation. American Political Science Review 105(3): 621‒30.
*Manin, Bernard (1997). The Principles of Representative Government. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press (Introduction and Chapters 5).

3. 4.3.2025 Key Components of Political Representation: Delegate vs Trustee

Required reading:
*Madison, James, Alexander Hamilton, and John Jay, 1787–8 [1987]. The Federalist Papers, Isaac Kramnick (ed.), Harmondsworth: Penguin.

Recommended reading:
*Rehfeld, Andrew (2009). Representation Rethought: On Trustees, Delegates, and Gyroscopes in the Study of Political Representation and Democracy. American Political Science Review 103(2): 214‒30.
*Bowler, S. (2017). Trustees, delegates, and responsiveness in comparative perspective. Comparative Political Studies, 50(6), 766-793.

4. 11.3.2025 Pitkin’s Four Views of Representation

Required reading:
Pitkin, Hanna F. (1967). The Concept of Representation. Berkeley: The University of California Press (Introduction and Chapter 7).

Recommended reading:
Pitkin, Hanna F. (1967). The Concept of Representation. Berkeley: The University of California Press (Chapter 8).
*Pitkin, H. F. (2004). Representation and democracy: uneasy alliance. Scandinavian Political Studies, 27(3), 335-342.

5. 18.3.2025 Authorization

Required reading:
*Mansbridge, Jane, 2009. “A Selection Model of Representation,” Journal of Political Philosophy, 17(4): 369–398.

Recommended reading:
*Saward, Michael, 2009. “Authorisation and Authenticity: Representation and the Unelected,” Journal of Political Philosophy, 17: 1–22.
*Guasti, Petra, Geissel, Brigite. (2021). Claims of Representation between Representation and Democratic Innovations. Frontiers in Political Science. XXX

6. 25.3.2025 Accountability

Required reading:
*Trounstine, Jessica. "Representation and accountability in cities." Annual Review of Political Science 13 (2010): 407-423.

Recommended reading:
*Mansbridge, Jane, 2004. “Representation Revisited: Introduction to the Case Against Electoral Accountability,” Democracy and Society, 2(I): 12–13.

BLOCK II. RETHINKING REPRESENTATION

7. 1.4.2025 Mansbridge’s Four Forms of Representation

Required reading:
*Mansbridge, Jane, 2003. “Rethinking Representation,” American Political Science Review, 97(4): 515–28.

Recommended reading:
*Williams, Melissa. S. (2012). Beyond the Empirical-Normative Divide: The Democratic Theory of Jane Mansbridge. PS: Political Science & Politics, 45(4), 797-805.

8. 8.4.2025 Descriptive vs Substantive Representation

Required reading:
*Mansbridge, Jane, 1999. “Should Blacks Represent Blacks and Women Represent Women? A Contingent ‘Yes’,” The Journal of Politics, 61: 628–57.

Recommended reading:
* Angelucci, D., Carrieri, L., & Improta, M. 2024. ‘No Participation Without Representation’: The Impact of Descriptive and Substantive Representation on the Age-Related Turnout Gap. Political Studies, 00323217241229316.
*Phillips, Anne (1995). The Politics of Presence. Oxford: Oxford University Press (Chapter 1).
*Mansbridge, J. (2015). Should workers represent workers? Swiss Political Science Review, 21(2), 261-270.
*McDonald, Michael D., Mendes, Silvia M. and Ian Budge (2004). What Are Elections For? Conferring the Median Mandate. British Journal of Political Science 34(1): 1‒26.
*Dovi, Suzanne, 2002. “Preferable Descriptive Representatives: Or Will Just Any Woman, Black, or Latino Do?,” American Political Science Review, 96: 745–754.

9. 15.4.2025 Responsive vs Responsible

Required reading:
*Pettit, Philip, 2010. “Representation, Responsive and Indicative,” Constellations, 17(3): 426–434.

Recommended reading:
*Trumm, S., & Barclay, A. 2023. Parliamentary representation: Should MPs prioritise their own views or those of their voters?. Political Studies, 71(4), 1151-1170.
*Severs, E., 2010. “Representation As Claims-Making. Quid Responsiveness?” Representation, 46(4): 411–423.
*Mair, Peter. 2009. Representative versus Responsible Government. Cologne: MplfG Working Paper 09/8.

BLOCK III. CONTEMPORARY ADVANCES IN REPRESENTATION

10. 22.4.2025 Representative Claim

Required reading:
Saward, Michael, 2006. "The representative claim." Contemporary political theory, 5(3): 297–318.

Recommended reading:
Guasti, Petra, and Brigitte Geissel. "Saward’s concept of the representative claim revisited: An empirical perspective." Politics and Governance 7.3 (2019): 98-111.
De Wilde, Pieter. "Representative claims analysis: theory meets method." Journal of European Public Policy 20.2 (2013): 278-294.
Celis, Karen, et al. "Constituting women's interests through representative claims." Politics & Gender 10.2 (2014): 149.

11. 29.4.2025 Critical Reception of the Constructivist Turn

Required reading:
Disch, Lisa, 2015. “The Constructivist Turn in Democratic Representation: A Normative Dead-End?,” Constellations, 22(4): 487–499.

Recommended reading:
Schaap, Andrew, Thompson, Simon, Disch, Lisa, Castiglione, Dario and Saward, Michael, 2012. “Critical exchange on Michael Saward’s The Representative Claim,” Contemporary Political Theory, 11(1): 109–127.
Nässtrom, Sofia, 2011. "Where is the representative turn going?" European journal of political theory, 10(4): 501–510.

12. 6.5.2025 Representation as Advocacy and Discourse

Required reading:
*Urbinati, Nadia, 2000. “Representation as Advocacy: A Study of Democratic Deliberation,” Political Theory, 28: 258–786.

Recommended reading:
*Dryzek, John and Simon Niemeyer, 2008. "Discursive Representation," American Political Science Review, 102(4): 481–493.
*Montanaro, L., 2012. “The Democratic Legitimacy of Self-appointed Representatives,” The Journal of Politics, 74(4): 1094–1107.

Additional readings:
Andeweg, Rudy B., and Jacques J.A. Thomassen, 2005. “Modes of Political Representation: Toward a new typology,” Legislative Studies Quarterly, 30(4): 507–528.
Mansbridge, J. (2005). Quota problems: Combating the dangers of essentialism. Politics & Gender, 1(4), 622.
Rehfeld, A. 2006. “Towards a General Theory of Political Representation,” The Journal of Politics, 68: 1–21.
Runciman, David, 2007. “The Paradox of Political Representation,” Journal of Political Philosophy, 15: 93–114.
Saward, Michael, 2014. "Shape-shifting representation." American Political Science Review, 108(4): 723–736.
–––, 2010—the Representative Claim, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
–––, 2008. "Representation and democracy: revisions and possibilities," Sociology Compass, 2(3): 1000–1013.
Vieira, Monica and David Runciman, 2008. Representation, Cambridge: Polity Press.
Vieira, Monica (ed.), 2017. Reclaiming Representation: Contemporary Advances in the Theory of Political Representation, New York: Routledge Press.
Warren, Mark and Dario Castiglione, 2004. “The Transformation of Democratic Representation,” Democracy and Society, 2(1): 5–22.

Critic of Representation
Dryzek, John, 1996. “Political Inclusion and the Dynamics of Democratization,” American Political Science Review, 90 (September): 475–487.
Pateman, Carole, 1970. Participation and Democratic Theory, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Rousseau, Jean Jacques, 1762, The Social Contract, Judith Masters and Roger Masters (trans.), New York: St. Martins Press, 1978.
Saward, Michael, 2008. “Representation and Democracy: Revisions and Possibilities,” Sociology Compass, 2: 1000–1013.

Democratic Representation
Caramani (2017) Will Versus Reason: The Populist and Technocratic Challenge to the Party Model of Political Representation. American Political Science Review 111(1): 1‒14.
Caramani, Daniele, Celis, Karen, and Bram Wauters (2014). "The Representation of Old and New Groups." In Deschouwer, Kris and Sam Depauw (eds.), Representing the People: A Survey of Members of Statewide and Sub-State Parliaments. Oxford: Oxford University Press (Chapter 3).
Castiglione, D., 2015. "Trajectories and Transformations of the Democratic Representative System." Global Policy, 6(S1): 8–16.
Dalton, Russell J. (1985). Political Parties and Political Representation: Party Supporters and Party Elites in Nine Nations. Comparative Political Studies 18(3): 267‒99.
Disch, Lisa, 2011. "Toward a Mobilization Conception of Democratic Representation," American Political Science Review, 105(1): 100–114.
–––, 2012. “Democratic representation and the constituency paradox,” Perspectives on Politics, 10(3): 599–616.
Dovi, Suzanne, 2007. The Good Representative, New York: Wiley-Blackwell Publishing.
–––, 2016. "Hanna Pitkin, The Concept of Representation," The Oxford Handbook of Classics in Contemporary Political Theory, Jacob Levy (ed.), Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI: 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198717133.013.24
Näsström, Sofia, 2006. “Representative democracy as tautology: Ankersmit and Lefort on representation,” European Journal of Political Theory, 5(3): 321–342.
Önnudóttir, E. H. (2014). Policy congruence and style of representation: Party voters and political parties. West European Politics, 37(3), 538-563.
Saward, Michael, 2008. “Representation and Democracy: Revisions and Possibilities,” Sociology Compass, 2: 1000–1013.
Urbinati, Nadia, 2011. “Political Representation as Democratic Process,” Redescriptions (Yearbook of Political Thought and Conceptual History: Volume 10), Kari Palonen (ed.), Helsinki: Transaction Publishers.

Poslední úprava: Guasti Petra, doc. Dr. habil. MA PhDr., Ph.D. (21.01.2025)