Abstract
Although upper chambers play a key role in democratic systems, little is known about how citizens actually perceive their functions. The Czech Senate offers an instructive case due to its ambiguous institutional position and relatively low public visibility. This paper examines how Czech voters perceive the Senate and how these perceptions have evolved over time, distinguishing three main conceptions: an oversight institution within the horizontal separation of powers, a representative of territorial interests and an independent, elitist ‘Chamber of wisdom.’ The analysis draws on a large, original dataset covering all Senate elections from 1996 to 2022, including newly constructed variables capturing candidate characteristics and constituency-level features. Candidate-level regression models identify which types of candidates are most successful and what this implies for perceptions of the Senate’s role. The findings reveal effects of variables connected to all three alternative perceptions of the Senate. They also suggest that the Senate’s independent and less partisan character has gradually strengthened, demonstrating that institutional meanings can evolve in practice even without formal constitutional change. By combining comprehensive electoral data with novel measures, the study contributes to broader debates on the relationship between formal institutional design and citizens’ perceptions, and on electoral behaviour in second-order elections.