{rfName}
Te

Indexed in

License and use

Citations

9

Altmetrics

Grant support

The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This project has been financed by the Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competition (CSO2011-28635).

Analysis of institutional authors

León, SandraCorresponding Author

Share

January 13, 2025
Publications
>
Article
Green

Territorial cleavage or institutional break-up? Party integration and ideological cohesiveness among Spanish elites

Publicated to:PARTY POLITICS. 23 (3): 236-247 - 2017-05-01 23(3), DOI: 10.1177/1354068815588459

Authors: Leon, Sandra

Affiliations

Univ York, Polit, York, N Yorkshire, England - Author

Abstract

The literature that explores the relationship between decentralisation and the structure of the party system has barely explored an important dimension of party integration, namely the degree of ideological cohesiveness among parliamentary elites. This paper purports to fill the literature gap by analysing heterogeneity in attitudes towards devolution among representatives from Spanish state-wide parties (the People's Party (PP) and the Socialist Party (PSOE)). Drawing from a sample of 460 parliamentary elites, results show that within-party variation in preferences towards regional self-rule are accounted by the territorial cleavage (historical regions vs ordinary ones) as well as by an institutional cleavage, defined by the type of assembly - regional or national - in which representatives are elected. However, parties' political and organisational trajectories moderate the impact of those cleavages: territory prevails in accounting for internal variation within the PSOE, whereas the institutional cleavage is more important to explain internal cohesiveness among PP's party elites.

Keywords

Quality index

Bibliometric impact. Analysis of the contribution and dissemination channel

From a relative perspective, and based on the normalized impact indicator calculated from the Field Citation Ratio (FCR) of the Dimensions source, it yields a value of: 1.93, which indicates that, compared to works in the same discipline and in the same year of publication, it ranks as a work cited above average. (source consulted: Dimensions Aug 2025)

Specifically, and according to different indexing agencies, this work has accumulated citations as of 2025-08-03, the following number of citations:

  • WoS: 4
  • Scopus: 5

Impact and social visibility

From the perspective of influence or social adoption, and based on metrics associated with mentions and interactions provided by agencies specializing in calculating the so-called "Alternative or Social Metrics," we can highlight as of 2025-08-03:

  • The use, from an academic perspective evidenced by the Altmetric agency indicator referring to aggregations made by the personal bibliographic manager Mendeley, gives us a total of: 23.
  • The use of this contribution in bookmarks, code forks, additions to favorite lists for recurrent reading, as well as general views, indicates that someone is using the publication as a basis for their current work. This may be a notable indicator of future more formal and academic citations. This claim is supported by the result of the "Capture" indicator, which yields a total of: 23 (PlumX).

With a more dissemination-oriented intent and targeting more general audiences, we can observe other more global scores such as:

  • The Total Score from Altmetric: 1.
  • The number of mentions on the social network X (formerly Twitter): 2 (Altmetric).

It is essential to present evidence supporting full alignment with institutional principles and guidelines on Open Science and the Conservation and Dissemination of Intellectual Heritage. A clear example of this is:

  • The work has been submitted to a journal whose editorial policy allows open Open Access publication.

Leadership analysis of institutional authors

This work has been carried out with international collaboration, specifically with researchers from: United Kingdom.

There is a significant leadership presence as some of the institution’s authors appear as the first or last signer, detailed as follows: Last Author (LEON ALFONSO, SANDRA).

the author responsible for correspondence tasks has been LEON ALFONSO, SANDRA.