Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34876515›Full record

ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2021

A systems framework for remedying dysfunction in US democracy.

Samuel S-H Wang, Jonathan Cervas, Bernard Grofman, Keena Lipsitz

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Why depolarization is hard: Evaluating attempts to decrease partisan animosity in America.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Statistical Mechanics of Political Polarization.Entropy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022
    Article
  6. The emergence and perils of polarization.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2021
    Article
  7. The dynamics of political polarization.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2021
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Samuel S-H WangNeuroscience Institute, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ 08544; sswang@princeton.edu.ORCID 0000-0002-0490-9786
Jonathan CervasInstitute for Politics and Strategy, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA 15213.ORCID 0000-0001-9686-6308
Bernard GrofmanDepartment of Political Science, University of California, Irvine, CA 92697.ORCID 0000-0002-2801-3351
Keena LipsitzQueens College, City University of New York, Flushing, NY 11367.ORCID 0000-0002-9192-836X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Democracy often fails to meet its ideals, and these failures may be made worse by electoral institutions. Unwanted outcomes include elite polarization, unresponsive representatives, and the ability of a faction of voters to gain power at the expense of the majority. Various reforms have been proposed to address these problems, but their effectiveness is difficult to predict against a backdrop of complex interactions. Here we outline a path for systems-level modeling to help understand and optimize repairs to US democracy. Following the tradition of engineering and biology, models of systems include mechanisms with dynamical properties that include nonlinearities and amplification (voting rules), positive feedback mechanisms (single-party control, gerrymandering), negative feedback (checks and balances), integration over time (lifetime judicial appointments), and low dimensionality (polarization). To illustrate a systems-level approach, we analyze three emergent phenomena: low dimensionality, elite polarization, and antimajoritarianism in legislatures. In each case, long-standing rules now contribute to undesirable outcomes as a consequence of changes in the political environment. Theoretical understanding at a general level will also help evaluate whether a proposed reform's benefits will materialize and be lasting, especially as conditions change again. In this way, rigorous modeling may not only shape new lines of research but aid in the design of effective and lasting reform.

Indexed as

complex systemsdemocracypolitical polarizationreformrepresentation

Identifiers

PMID34876515
PMCPMC8685721

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.