Survey was conducted before and after the parliamentary election in Romania on 11 December 2016 as a case study on the effect of ethnic party campaigns in communities with different ethnic compositions: ethnic Romanians living in predominantly Hungarian counties, ethnic Romanians in the rest of the country where they are in the majority, and ethnic Hungarians especially from central and western Romania. Respondents were interviewed a first time five to six weeks before the election and another time four to five weeks after the election. The questionnaire consisted of questions on ethnic belonging, trust in individuals and institutions, perceptions of electoral integrity, opinions on parties, and items on life satisfaction and assessments of the current social and political conditions of Romania. While, due to questionnaire constraints, some questions were asked in only one of the interviews, others were recorded in both waves, allowing for analyses of changes over time.The political mobilisation of ethnicity has led to tensions between ethnic groups in, for example, Belgium and Canada, and to violent conflict with disastrous consequences in such diverse cases as Cyprus, Rwanda, and Sri Lanka. Some observers point to the particularistic politics of ethnic parties as fomenting ethnic tensions and call for their regulation. Others argue that ethnic parties may be valuable vehicles in solving such tensions because they contribute to the integration of diverse ethnic groups. However, both views are so far based on assumptions rather than empirical evidence; to date, the effect of ethnic parties on ordinary people within society has not been examined directly. The project fills this gap, contributing to a better understanding of the links between ethnic parties and national unity within the population: Does the presence of ethnic parties affect the way people perceive the ethnic "other" or the nation? Is this effect positive, because ethnic parties as emancipatory vehicles increase the inclusion of ethnic minorities within the population? Or is it negative, because ethnic parties raise awareness of ethnic differences? To answer these questions, the project first conducts a global comparative analysis of 105 diverse countries, using a new multilevel dataset. It will then conduct in-depth studies of two countries to examine the nature of these links. Both the quantitative and in-depth analyses are needed to better understand whether there are general links between the presence of ethnic parties and diminished national unity throughout different contexts and to identify the nature of this link in important cases.

Stratified random sampling of three different groups. Sampling of primary sampling units: PSUs (localities) were sampled separately for each group: For Group 1, both urban and rural localities in the counties Harghita and Covasna were randomly sampled in proportion to the overall number of urban–rural localities in each county. For Group 2, counties other than Harghita and Covasna were randomly sampled from all NUTS2 regions. Within each selected county, both urban and rural localities were randomly sampled in proportion to the overall number of urban–rural localities in each county. For Group 3, both urban and rural localities in the counties Harghita, Covasna, Bihor, Mures, Satu Mare, and Cluj were randomly selected in proportion to the overall number of urban–rural localities in each county. Sampling of respondents within PSUs: The sampling of the secondary (households) and tertiary sampling units (individuals) was the same within each locality: a number of starting points were randomly sampled (1–2 per rural locality, more than 1–2 per urban locality). From these starting points interviewers initiated a random walk procedure, selecting the second house to the right and continuing to select every second house after that. In the case of a block of flats, interviewers went to the top floor and conducted the random walk procedure for apartments. At each house or flat, the voting-age person with the most recent birthday was selected for participation. Only one person per household was interviewed. Interviewers made three attempts to interview selected people at different days and times of day before using a pre-selected substitute. A maximum number of 10 interviews was conducted from each starting point. Targeted sample: In total, 1,200 respondents are interviewed per wave, made up of the following three groups: 400 Romanian-speaking citizens aged 18 years or above in Harghita and Covasna counties; 400 Romanian-speaking citizens aged 18 years or above from the other 39 counties and the municipality of Bucharest; 400 Hungarian-speaking citizens aged 18 years or above from throughout Romania – especially from the Central area and West side of the country. Obtained sample: 401 Romanian-speaking citizens aged 18 years or above in Harghita and Covasna counties; 418 Romanian-speaking citizens aged 18 years or above from the other 39 counties and the municipality of Bucharest; 423 Hungarian-speaking citizens aged 18 years or above from throughout Romania – especially from the Central area and West side of the country.