Accepting a party’s decision to (not) participate in a coalition government. Does the inclusiveness of the decision-makers make a difference?

The decision whether or not to participate in a coalition government is crucial for parties operating in parliamentary democracies using a list-PR system. For party members, agreeing (winning) or disagreeing (losing) with this decision can potentially have a considerable impact on their attitudes and potential behavior including party and membership satisfaction, support for the decision-making process, decision acceptance, activity within the party, leaving the party and no longer voting for the party. It has extensively been documented that losers of elections and referendums become less supportive of the political system, but the question is whether such a winner-loser gap also occurs when party members win or lose on a difficult party decision. In addition, according to the procedural fairness theory, including party members in the decision-making process might ease the pain of losing. However, the exact impact of the openness of decision-makers (inclusive or exclusive) on the effect of winning and losing on members' attitudes and potential behavior remains unclear. Based on a survey experiment among party members of two parties in Flanders (Belgium), we find consistently significant differences in members' attitudes and potential behavior after winning or losing the decision of government participation. Remarkably, there is only limited moderating influence of the kind of decision-makers on the effect of winning or losing.