Political Regimes, Religious Dominance, and Economic Preferences
Insights from the World Values Survey and Global State of Democracy Indices
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 10763003 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Vivek Jadhav (0000-0002-5500-8101, Institute of Management Technology Ghaziabad India, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2025 |
| Volume | 106 |
| Issue | 1 |
| Publication date | 2025-01-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Social Science Quarterly (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0038-4941 • E-ISSN: 1540-6237 |
| Publisher | Wiley (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1111/ssqu.13482 |
| OpenAlex | W4405681897 |
| Language | EN |
| References cited | 50 |
Objective This research explores how political regimes, individual incomes, and religious dominance influence societies' attitudes toward freedom, equality, and income inequality. This work applies an empirical framework on political regimes and socio‐religious contexts to study the impacts of political regimes and socioeconomic variables on individual beliefs about freedom, equality, and income inequality. Methods Utilizing data from the World Values Survey (WVS) along with the Global State of Democracy (GSoD) indices, the study employs a two‐stage regression model to control for issues of endogeneity. This approach helps to understand differences in preferences for freedom and equality under democratic, authoritarian, and hybrid regimes, along with the influence of income and religious dominance. Findings The results show that democratic regimes prioritize equality, especially among the poor and members of non‐dominant religious groups. Under authoritarian regimes, however, high‐income populations tend to favour freedom. Hybrid regimes exhibit varied tendencies, with both income status and religious dominance significantly influencing perceptions of equality. Conclusion This research contributes to understanding how political, economic, and religious factors shape societal preferences. The results provide insights into the complex interplay between governance, socioeconomic conditions, and individual preferences
Biology · Democracy · Development economics · Dominance (genetics) · Economics · Geography · Islam · Political economy · Political science · Politics · Positive economics · Religious values · Social science · Sociology · State (computer science) · Statistics · Survey data collection · World Values Survey · Culture, Economy, and Development Studies · Law · Religion and Society Interactions · Religion, Society, and Development
The Nature and Origins of Mass Opinion
A Theory of Political Transitions
Democracy and growth
Income and Democracy
Why Does Inequality Matter?
Democracy and Development
Causality and Feedback Between Institutional Measures and Economic Growth
Inequality and Institutions
Inoculation Reduces Misinformation
Oligarchy, democracy, inequality and growth
Democracy as an equilibrium
Curriculum and Ideology
The Great Divide
Civil Society and the Legacies of Dictatorship
Democracy in Transition
Who Toes the Party Line? Cues, Values, and Individual Differences
Partisanship and Preference Formation
The Influence of Partisan Motivated Reasoning on Public Opinion
The Legacies of 1989
How elitism undermines the study of voter competence
Communism's Shadow
How Do Inclusionary and Exclusionary Autocracies Affect Ordinary People
Protests and Voter Defections in Electoral Autocracies
The Ideological Shadow of Authoritarianism
How Political Parties Shape Public Opinion in the Real World
The Impact of Party Identification on Issue Attitudes
People's opium? Religion and economic attitudes
Religion and Economic Growth across Countries
Religion, self-regulation, and self-control
The Last Instance
Communist socialization and post-communist economic and political attitudes
Institutions
Expressive Partisanship
Some Social Requisites of Democracy
Elite Influence on Public Opinion in an Informed Electorate
The Impact of Religious Involvement on Migration
Prosocial Behavior and Religion
| Citation velocity | historical |
|---|---|
| Highly cited | No |