Is democracy about redistribution?
Carl Henrik Knutsen∗and Simone Wegmann†
Online Appendix
November 20, 2015
∗
Department of Political Science, University of Oslo; email: c.h.knutsen@stv.uio.no
Department of Political Science and International Relations, University of Geneva; email: simone.wegmann@unige.ch
†
In this online appendix we provide further information on the data material included
in the analysis, the WVS questions used for constructing our variables and our specific
operationalizations, as well as additional analyses and robustness checks not reported in
tables in the paper.
Table A.1 lists all the countries included in the analyses, and the number of respondents
per country.
Table A.2 shows the exact percentages for respondents on the different answer categories for all items included in the WVS wave 5 question about characteristics of democracy. Figure A.1 shows the distribution of the different answer categories for all items on
this question for WVS wave 6.
Table A.3 shows all WVS questions employed to construct the different variables
entering in the analyses. We show the original questions, including the answer categories.
We also detail how these variables have been recoded before being used in our regressions.
Table A.4 shows the OLS regressions with country-level independent variables discussed in the paper. The dependent variable in these models is the share of democratic
redistributionists (based on our main "median measure") in the country’s population.
Figure A.2 shows predicted probabilities of being "democratic redistributionists" for
all different categories of subjective class, education, and income scale based on Model 5
presented in Table 1.
Finally, we include the various robustness checks of the results presented in Table
1 in the paper. Table A.5 shows the results of logistic multilevel regressions on being
"democratic redistributionists" similar to in Table 1, but omitting Indian respondents.
As we note in the paper, this is due to different answer categories (only 0, 5, 10) being
employed for the WVS question in India. Table A.6 presents logistic multilevel regressions of "democratic redistributionists" using all five different ways of operationalizing the
dependent variable presented in the paper. Please note that three of the models employ
measures capturing whether redistribution is among the most important characteristics
of democracy, whereas two use measures capturing whether redistribution is considered
an important characteristic of democracy. While the operationalization of the dependent
variable is different across these models, all models are otherwise similar to Model 4 in
Table 1 of the paper, with one notable exception: Since Model IV uses the 1–10 item
scores directly, this model is a linear rather than logistic hierarchical model. Finally,
Table A.7 show the results of the logistic multilevel regressions on "democratic redistribu-
tionists" run on data from both WVS Wave 5 and Wave 6 (otherwise same specifications
as in Table 1, except the median-based measure is calculated over the 7 common items of
Waves 5 and 6).
Table A.1: Sample overview
Country
Algeria
Andorra
Argentina
Armenia
Australia
Azerbaijan
Belarus
Brazil
Bulgaria
Burkina Faso
Canada
Chile
China
Colombia
Cyprus
Ecuador
Egypt
Estonia
Ethiopia
Finland
Georgia
Germany
Ghana
India
Indonesia
Iraq
Japan
Jordan
Kazakhstan
Kuwait
Kyrgyzstan
Lebanon
Libya
Malaysia
Mali
Mexico
WVS 5
WVS 6
940
961
683
1,323
1,260
658
1,084
1,720
756
737
1,030
2,857
1,227
947
967
1,834
1,331
977
1,511
691
937
1,192
1,052
1,300
1,004
1,002
999
1,500
846
1,762
1,425
961
1,191
1,523
1,376
1,888
1,552
1,170
1,666
1,168
1,500
1,047
1,466
1,144
1,864
1,299
Country
Moldova
Morocco
Netherlands
New Zealand
Nigeria
Norway
Pakistan
Peru
Philippines
Poland
Qatar
Romania
Russia
Rwanda
Serbia
Singapore
Slovenia
South Africa
South Korea
Spain
Sweden
Switzerland
Taiwan
Thailand
Trinidad and Tobago
Tunisia
Turkey
Ukraine
United States
Uruguay
Uzbekistan
Vietnam
Yemen
Zambia
Zimbabwe
WVS 5
865
772
WVS 6
853
1,487
639
1,759
984
1,212
767
1,306
1,189
1,068
1,196
806
1,022
1,354
2,113
1,527
924
780
2,381
1,198
979
934
1,077
1,189
1,498
913
1,192
656
1,166
896
1,921
936
1,183
1,011
1,057
1,113
911
1,055
1,536
1,500
2,128
860
1,415
1,139
888
1,242
1,500
1,892
WVS 5 and WVS 6 indicate the number of individuals included in waves 5 and 6,
respectively. Wave 5 was conducted from 2005–2009, and Wave 6 from 2010-2014.
Table A.2: Essential characteristics of democracy (from WVS Wave 5)
How essential you think
is it as a characteristic
of democracy
i) Governments tax the
rich and subsidize
the poor.
ii) Religious authorities
interpret the laws.
iii) People choose their
leaders in free elections.
iv) People receive state
aid for unemployment.
v) The army takes over
when government is
incompetent.
vi) Civil rights protect
people’s liberty against
oppression.
vii) The economy
is prospering.
viii) Criminals are
severely punished.
ix) People can change
laws in referendums.
x) Women have same
rights as men.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
9.46
3.87
5.17
4.95
11.98
8.29
11.12
13.33
8.31
23.53
29.10
9.48
9.05
7.01
12.66
6.97
5.83
5.67
3.58
10.63
2.18
1.02
1.21
1.78
4.85
4.08
6.50
10.97
12.80
54.63
6.14
2.64
3.34
4.08
9.80
8.15
11.01
14.17
10.92
29.76
32.33
9.21
7.34
5.67
10.84
6.35
5.91
6.02
4.17
12.15
3.95
1.36
1.72
2.41
7.70
6.24
8.69
13.74
12.93
41.26
3.66
1.66
2.03
2.59
8.91
7.07
10.26
14.15
12.58
37.08
5.80
2.62
3.18
3.28
8.15
6.33
8.43
11.85
11.96
38.42
3.72
1.69
2.22
2.56
7.47
6.33
8.65
13.03
12.71
41.63
2.63
0.91
1.20
1.55
5.64
4.03
5.48
9.01
11.97
57.57
N 51105; % of respondents for each category (1 to 10).
1 indicating that the individual rated the characteristic as "not at all essential for democracy" and 10
indicating that the individual rated the characteristic as "essential for democracy".
Figure A.1: Essential characteristics of democracy - WVS wave 6
30000
30000
30000
30000
30000
25000
25000
25000
25000
25000
20000
20000
20000
20000
20000
15000
15000
15000
15000
15000
10000
10000
10000
10000
10000
5000
5000
5000
5000
5000
1
10
(i) tax rich and subsidize poor
1
10
(ii) Rel authorities interpret laws
1
10
(iii) free elections
1
10
(iv) state aid for unemployment
30000
30000
30000
30000
25000
25000
25000
25000
20000
20000
20000
20000
15000
15000
15000
15000
10000
10000
10000
10000
5000
5000
5000
5000
1
10
(vi) civil rights
1
10
(vii) state makes income equal
1
10
(viii) people obey rulers
1
10
(ix) women same rights
1
10
(v) army takes over
Table A.3: World Values Survey Questions
Variable
Survey question
Answer categories
Age
Can you tell me your year of birth, please? 19...
This means you are ... years old
(write in age in two digits).
Highest educational
level
What is the highest educational level that you have attained?
1 Inadequately completed elementary education; 2 Completed (compulsory) elementary education; 3 Incomplete
secondary school: technical/ vocational type/(Compulsory)
elementary education and basic vocational qualification; 4 Complete secondary school: technical/ vocational type/Secondary, intermediate vocational qualification; 5 Incomplete secondary: university-preparatory
type/Secondary,intermediate general qualification; 6 Complete secondary: university-preparatory type/Full secondary, maturity level certificate; 7 Some university without degree/Higher education - lower-level tertiary certificate; 8 University with degree/Higher education - upperlevel tertiary certificate
This variable is recoded into five categories: 1= 1; 2= 2
and 3= 3: 4 and 5; 4= 6 and 7; 5 = 8 and 9
Scale of income
On this card is a scale of incomes on which 1 indicates the "lowest
income decile" and 10 the "highest income decile" in your country.
We would like to know in what group your household is. Please,
specify the appropriate number, counting all wages, salaries, pensions and other incomes that come in.
1 (lowest decile) to 10 (highest decile). This variable is
recoded into four categories: 1= first, second, and third
steps; 2= fourth, fifth, and sixth steps; 3= seventh, eighth,
nineth steps; 4= upper step. Models were also tested for a
different recoding generating the same results: 1= first and
second steps; 2= third, fourth, and fifth steps; 3= sixth,
seventh, and eighth steps; 4= nineth and upper step
Table continued
Variable
Subjective
class
social
Income should be
made equal; People
should take responsibility
WVS
democracy
characteristics,
Wave 6
Survey question
Answer categories
People sometimes describe themselves as belonging to the working
class, the middle class, or the upper or lower class. Would you
describe yourself as belonging to the:
Now I’d like you to tell me your views on various issues. How
would you place your vies on this scale? 1 means you agree completely with the statement on the left; 10 means you agree completely with the statement on the right; and if your views fall
somewhere in between, you can choose any number in between.
i) Incomes should be made more equal vs. We need larger income
differences as incentives
ii) People should take more responsibility to provide for themselves vs. The government should take more responsibility to ensure tat everyone is provided for.
1 Upper class; 2 Upper middle class; 3 Lower middle class;
4 Working class; 5 Lower class
Many things may be desirable, but not all of them are essential
characteristics of democracy. Please tell me for each of the following things how essential you think it is as a characteristic of
democracy. Use this scale where 1 means ‘not at all an essential characteristic of democracy’ and 10 means it definitely is ‘an
essential characteristic of democracy
i) Governments tax the rich and subsidize the poor
ii) Religious authorities interpret the laws
iii) People choose their leaders in free elections
iv) People receive state aid for unemployment
v) The army takes over when government is incompetent
vi) Civil rights protect people’s liberty against oppression
vii) The state makes people’s incomes equal
viii) People obey their rulers
ix) Women have the same rights as men
10-point scale
10- points scale. These variables are recoded into dummy
variables indicating 1 for ratings of 6 and more.
Table A.4: OLS regressions with country-level factors on share of democratic redistributionists in population
Democracy
Communist regime experience
(past or present)
Recent democratization
(after 1989)
Ln population
MI
MII
MIII
MIV
-0.042*
(-1.89)
-0.111***
(-3.73)
-0.062*
(-2.00)
-0.116***
(-3.81)
0.007
(0.26)
0.004
(0.58)
0.018
(1.50)
-0.078**
(-2.46)
-0.132***
(-4.19)
0.012
(0.43)
0.003
(0.49)
0.010
(0.82)
-0.002
(-1.24)
-0.098**
(-2.57)
-0.111***
(-3.01)
0.004
(0.14)
0.000
(0.05)
0.016
(0.95)
Ln GDP per capita
Disposable income inequality
Redistribution
(reduction from gross to disposable inequality)
Constant
N
0.221***
(10.81)
45
0.012
(0.08)
43
0.169
(1.00)
40
0.000
(0.30)
0.119
(0.64)
34
*** p < 0.01, ** p < 0.05, * p < 0.10.
Cross country OLS regressions with share of population scoring 1 on “democratic redistributionist"
measure as dependent variable. T-values in parentheses. All independent variables are measured
in 2005.
Figure A.2: Probability of being "democratic redistributionist" - M5
upper
lower
0.4
0.3
0.0
0.1
0.2
Pr (democractic redistributionist)
0.3
0.0
0.1
0.2
Pr (democratic redistributionist)
0.3
0.2
0.0
0.1
Pr (democratic redistributionist)
Income scale
0.4
Education
0.4
Subjective class
lowest
highest
lowest
highest
Simulations of predicted probabilities are shown for a male individual with an education level of 4, an
income scale of 4, and subjective class of 3, living in a democracy with no recent democratization history
and no communist past. All other variables were held at their mean.
Table A.5: Logistic multilevel regression of "democratic redistributionists" – median-based measure, excluding India from sample
Individual level
Age
Sex (female)
Subjective class 2
Subjective class 3
Subjective class 4
Subjective class 5 (Lower)
Education 2
Education 3
Education 4
Education 5 (Highest)
Income scale 2
Income scale 3
Income scale 4 (Highest)
We need larger income differences
People should take responsibility
M1
M2
M2b
M3
M3b
M4
M4b
M4c
M5
M5b
−0.00∗∗
(0.00)
−0.01
(0.02)
−0.01
(0.10)
0.03
(0.10)
0.03
(0.10)
0.17
(0.11)
−0.17∗∗
(0.06)
−0.30∗∗∗
(0.06)
−0.25∗∗∗
(0.06)
−0.28∗∗∗
(0.06)
−0.00∗∗
(0.00)
0.00
(0.03)
−0.01
(0.11)
0.03
(0.11)
0.05
(0.11)
0.21
(0.11)
−0.17∗∗
(0.06)
−0.32∗∗∗
(0.06)
−0.26∗∗∗
(0.06)
−0.30∗∗∗
(0.07)
0.08∗
(0.03)
0.10∗
(0.04)
0.12
(0.09)
−0.00∗∗
(0.00)
−0.00
(0.03)
−0.01
(0.11)
0.03
(0.11)
0.04
(0.11)
0.21
(0.11)
−0.17∗∗
(0.06)
−0.31∗∗∗
(0.06)
−0.25∗∗∗
(0.06)
−0.30∗∗∗
(0.07)
0.07∗
(0.03)
0.11∗∗
(0.04)
0.14
(0.09)
−0.06∗
(0.03)
0.00
(0.03)
−0.00∗∗
(0.00)
0.00
(0.03)
−0.01
(0.11)
0.03
(0.11)
0.06
(0.11)
0.21
(0.11)
−0.16∗∗
(0.06)
−0.31∗∗∗
(0.06)
−0.25∗∗∗
(0.06)
−0.29∗∗∗
(0.07)
0.08∗
(0.03)
0.10∗
(0.04)
0.12
(0.09)
−0.00∗∗
(0.00)
0.00
(0.03)
−0.01
(0.11)
0.03
(0.11)
0.06
(0.11)
0.21
(0.11)
−0.16∗∗
(0.06)
−0.31∗∗∗
(0.06)
−0.25∗∗∗
(0.06)
−0.29∗∗∗
(0.07)
0.08∗
(0.03)
0.10∗
(0.04)
0.12
(0.09)
−0.00∗∗
(0.00)
0.01
(0.03)
0.00
(0.12)
0.10
(0.12)
0.10
(0.12)
0.32∗
(0.13)
−0.23∗
(0.10)
−0.37∗∗∗
(0.10)
−0.35∗∗∗
(0.10)
−0.33∗∗∗
(0.10)
−0.01
(0.04)
0.00
(0.05)
0.08
(0.10)
−0.00∗∗
(0.00)
0.01
(0.03)
0.00
(0.12)
0.10
(0.12)
0.10
(0.12)
0.32∗
(0.13)
−0.24∗
(0.10)
−0.39∗∗∗
(0.10)
−0.37∗∗∗
(0.10)
−0.35∗∗∗
(0.10)
−0.01
(0.04)
0.00
(0.05)
0.08
(0.10)
−0.00∗∗
(0.00)
0.01
(0.03)
0.00
(0.12)
0.10
(0.12)
0.10
(0.12)
0.32∗
(0.13)
−0.22∗
(0.10)
−0.37∗∗∗
(0.10)
−0.35∗∗∗
(0.10)
−0.33∗∗∗
(0.10)
−0.01
(0.04)
0.00
(0.05)
0.08
(0.10)
−0.00∗∗
(0.00)
0.01
(0.03)
−0.02
(0.11)
0.02
(0.11)
0.04
(0.11)
0.20
(0.11)
−0.16∗∗
(0.06)
−0.31∗∗∗
(0.06)
−0.26∗∗∗
(0.06)
−0.30∗∗∗
(0.07)
0.08∗
(0.03)
0.11∗∗
(0.04)
0.10
(0.09)
−0.00∗∗
(0.00)
0.01
(0.03)
−0.02
(0.11)
0.02
(0.11)
0.04
(0.11)
0.20
(0.11)
−0.16∗∗
(0.06)
−0.31∗∗∗
(0.06)
−0.26∗∗∗
(0.06)
−0.30∗∗∗
(0.07)
0.08∗
(0.03)
0.11∗∗
(0.04)
0.10
(0.09)
Table continued
M1
M2
M2b
Country level
Democracy
M3
M3b
M4
−0.25
(0.16)
−0.25
(0.16)
−0.69∗∗
(0.25)
Polity 2 (Anocracy)
−0.98∗∗∗
(0.24)
0.74
(0.39)
−0.09
(0.34)
−0.82∗∗∗
(0.25)
−0.08
(0.19)
−0.04
(0.38)
−0.02
(0.05)
0.17
(0.11)
−0.00
(0.01)
−0.01
(0.01)
−0.18
(0.19)
−0.12
(0.39)
0.01
(0.05)
0.18
(0.11)
−0.00
(0.01)
0.00
(0.01)
−1.25
(1.25)
28940.45
-14447.23
30773
31
−2.73
(1.43)
28942.39
-14447.19
30773
31
Polity 3 (Democracy)
−0.97∗∗∗
(0.21)
Communist regime experience
Age X Communist regime exp.
−1.20∗∗∗
(0.27)
0.01
(0.00)
Recent democratization
(after 1989)
Ethnic fractionalization
Ln population
Ln GPD per Capita
Redistribution (reduction gross
to disposabel income inequality)
Disposable income inequality
Democracy X Redist. (gross
to disposable income inequailty)
Democracy X Disposable
income inequality
Intercept
AIC
Log Likelihood
Number of observatoins
Number of groups
∗∗∗
−1.29∗∗∗
(0.15)
42196.93
-21086.47
45288
43
−1.34∗∗∗
(0.15)
39565.05
-19767.53
42257
41
−1.30∗∗∗
(0.16)
39040.96
-19503.48
41696
41
−1.04∗∗∗
(0.19)
39551.07
-19758.54
42257
41
−1.03∗∗∗
(0.19)
39551.23
-19757.62
42257
41
M4b
M4c
M5
0.67
(0.97)
−0.42
(0.22)
M5b
−0.98∗∗∗
(0.24)
−1.01∗∗∗
(0.22)
0.29
(0.33)
−0.13
(0.31)
−0.92∗∗∗
(0.24)
−0.06
(0.19)
−0.11
(0.37)
0.00
(0.05)
0.16
(0.11)
−0.05
(0.08)
0.01
(0.02)
0.04
(0.07)
−0.04
(0.03)
−2.23
(1.49)
28942.47
-14446.23
30773
31
−0.03
(0.18)
−0.14
(0.35)
0.01
(0.05)
0.14
(0.09)
−0.09
(0.17)
−0.08
(0.35)
0.03
(0.05)
0.13
(0.10)
−2.28∗
(1.14)
38200.05
-19079.02
40391
39
−2.71∗
(1.26)
38202.78
-19079.39
40391
39
p < 0.001, ∗∗ p < 0.01, ∗ p < 0.05.
Random intercept logistic regression with individuals scoring 1 on “democratic redistributionist" measure (based on the median) as dependent variable. All
independent variables are measured in 2005. The reference categories for the set of class dummies is “upper class", whereas “low" is the reference category
for both the education and income dummies.
Table A.6: Logistic (I–III and V) and linear (IV) multilevel regression of "democratic redistributionists"
Individual level
Age
Sex (female)
Subjective class 2
Subjective class 3
Subjective class 4
Subjective class 5 (Lower)
Education 2
Education 3
Education 4
Education 5 (Highest)
Income scale 2
Income scale 3
Income scale 4 (Highest)
Country level
Democracy
Recent democratization
(after 1989)
Communist regime experience
Ethnic fractionalization
Ln population
Ln GDP per Capita
Redistribution (reduction gross
to disposable income inequality)
Disposable income inequality
I
II
III
IV
V
−0.00∗∗∗
(0.00)
0.01
(0.03)
0.01
(0.12)
0.11
(0.12)
0.11
(0.12)
0.31∗
(0.12)
−0.31∗∗∗
(0.09)
−0.46∗∗∗
(0.09)
−0.44∗∗∗
(0.09)
−0.42∗∗∗
(0.09)
−0.01
(0.04)
−0.00
(0.05)
0.06
(0.10)
−0.00∗∗∗
(0.00)
0.01
(0.03)
0.01
(0.12)
0.11
(0.12)
0.11
(0.12)
0.31∗
(0.12)
−0.31∗∗∗
(0.09)
−0.46∗∗∗
(0.09)
−0.44∗∗∗
(0.09)
−0.42∗∗∗
(0.09)
−0.01
(0.04)
−0.00
(0.05)
0.06
(0.10)
−0.00∗∗
(0.00)
0.04
(0.04)
−0.06
(0.16)
−0.02
(0.16)
0.04
(0.16)
0.21
(0.17)
−0.35∗∗∗
(0.10)
−0.58∗∗∗
(0.11)
−0.69∗∗∗
(0.11)
−0.86∗∗∗
(0.11)
−0.08
(0.05)
−0.12
(0.07)
−0.30
(0.17)
0.00∗∗
(0.00)
0.03
(0.03)
0.33∗∗
(0.12)
0.53∗∗∗
(0.12)
0.61∗∗∗
(0.12)
0.81∗∗∗
(0.13)
−0.12
(0.10)
−0.22∗
(0.10)
−0.24∗
(0.10)
−0.24∗
(0.10)
−0.17∗∗∗
(0.04)
−0.14∗∗
(0.05)
−0.39∗∗∗
(0.10)
0.00
(0.00)
0.02
(0.02)
0.15
(0.10)
0.30∗∗
(0.10)
0.36∗∗∗
(0.10)
0.44∗∗∗
(0.10)
−0.09
(0.09)
−0.16
(0.08)
−0.15
(0.08)
−0.09
(0.09)
−0.05
(0.03)
−0.03
(0.04)
−0.19∗
(0.08)
−0.59∗
(0.23)
−0.12
(0.19)
−1.00∗∗∗
(0.24)
−0.06
(0.37)
0.00
(0.04)
0.13
(0.10)
−0.00
(0.01)
−0.01
(0.01)
−0.59∗
(0.23)
−0.12
(0.19)
−1.00∗∗∗
(0.24)
−0.06
(0.37)
0.00
(0.04)
0.13
(0.10)
−0.00
(0.01)
−0.01
(0.01)
−0.45
(0.30)
0.08
(0.25)
−0.17
(0.30)
0.08
(0.49)
0.08
(0.06)
0.05
(0.14)
−0.02∗
(0.01)
−0.01
(0.01)
−0.91
(0.49)
0.43
(0.39)
−1.07∗
(0.48)
−0.84
(0.78)
0.17
(0.09)
−0.18
(0.21)
−0.00
(0.01)
−0.05∗∗
(0.02)
−0.89∗∗
(0.28)
0.39
(0.22)
−0.82∗∗
(0.27)
−0.52
(0.44)
0.09
(0.05)
−0.09
(0.12)
−0.00
(0.01)
−0.05∗∗∗
(0.01)
Table continued
Intercept
AIC
Log Likelihood
Number of observations
Number of groups
∗∗∗
I
II
III
IV
V
−1.17
(1.23)
29874.46
-14914.23
31654
32
−1.17
(1.23)
29874.46
-14914.23
31654
32
−2.60
(1.68)
17443.32
-8698.66
32284
32
7.97∗∗
(2.60)
155705.12
-77828.56
32284
32
2.33
(1.47)
38856.83
-19405.41
31654
32
p < 0.001, ∗∗ p < 0.01, ∗ p < 0.05.
Model I dependent variable: median based variable;
Model II dependent variable: pairwise comparison (5 or more items rated higher than
redistribution;
Model III dependent variable: pairwise comparison (7 or more items rated higher than
redistribution);
Model IV dependent variable: original redistribution item (10-point scale);
Model V dependent variable: dummy scored 1 if original redistribution item ≥ 6 and 0
if < 6;
All independent variables are measured in 2005. The reference categories for the set
of class dummies is “upper class", whereas “low" is the reference category for both the
education and income dummies.
Table A.7: Logistic multilevel regression of "democratic redistributionists" - median based measure, WVS wave 5
and 6
Individual level
Age
Sex (female)
Subjective class 2
Subjective class 3
Subjective class 4
Subjective class 5 (Lower)
Education 2
Education 3
Education 4
Education 5 (Higher)
Income scale 2
Income scale 3
Income scale 4 (Highest)
M1
M2
M3
M3b
M4
M4b
M4c
M5
M5b
0.00
(0.00)
−0.01
(0.01)
−0.01
(0.06)
0.06
(0.06)
0.09
(0.06)
0.20∗∗∗
(0.06)
−0.05
(0.04)
−0.10∗∗
(0.04)
−0.12∗∗
(0.04)
−0.22∗∗∗
(0.04)
−0.00
(0.00)
−0.01
(0.01)
−0.03
(0.06)
0.02
(0.06)
0.05
(0.06)
0.14∗
(0.06)
−0.07
(0.04)
−0.12∗∗∗
(0.04)
−0.13∗∗∗
(0.04)
−0.23∗∗∗
(0.04)
0.00
(0.02)
−0.00
(0.02)
−0.20∗∗
(0.06)
−0.00
(0.00)
−0.00
(0.01)
−0.03
(0.06)
0.03
(0.06)
0.04
(0.06)
0.13∗
(0.06)
−0.08∗
(0.04)
−0.13∗∗∗
(0.04)
−0.14∗∗∗
(0.04)
−0.24∗∗∗
(0.04)
0.00
(0.02)
0.00
(0.03)
−0.18∗∗
(0.06)
−0.00
(0.00)
−0.00
(0.01)
−0.03
(0.06)
0.03
(0.06)
0.04
(0.06)
0.13∗
(0.06)
−0.08∗
(0.04)
−0.13∗∗∗
(0.04)
−0.14∗∗∗
(0.04)
−0.24∗∗∗
(0.04)
0.00
(0.02)
0.00
(0.03)
−0.18∗∗
(0.06)
−0.00
(0.00)
0.00
(0.02)
0.01
(0.08)
0.09
(0.08)
0.11
(0.08)
0.22∗∗
(0.08)
−0.19∗∗
(0.06)
−0.29∗∗∗
(0.06)
−0.28∗∗∗
(0.06)
−0.41∗∗∗
(0.06)
−0.04
(0.02)
−0.06
(0.03)
−0.16∗
(0.07)
−0.00
(0.00)
0.00
(0.02)
0.01
(0.08)
0.09
(0.08)
0.11
(0.08)
0.22∗∗
(0.08)
−0.19∗∗
(0.06)
−0.29∗∗∗
(0.06)
−0.27∗∗∗
(0.06)
−0.41∗∗∗
(0.06)
−0.04
(0.02)
−0.06
(0.03)
−0.16∗
(0.07)
−0.00
(0.00)
0.00
(0.02)
0.01
(0.08)
0.09
(0.08)
0.11
(0.08)
0.22∗∗
(0.08)
−0.19∗∗
(0.06)
−0.29∗∗∗
(0.06)
−0.28∗∗∗
(0.06)
−0.41∗∗∗
(0.06)
−0.04
(0.02)
−0.06
(0.03)
−0.16∗
(0.07)
0.00
(0.00)
−0.00
(0.02)
−0.04
(0.06)
0.02
(0.06)
0.03
(0.06)
0.13∗
(0.06)
−0.08∗
(0.04)
−0.14∗∗∗
(0.04)
−0.14∗∗∗
(0.04)
−0.25∗∗∗
(0.04)
0.01
(0.02)
0.00
(0.03)
−0.19∗∗
(0.06)
0.00
(0.00)
0.00
(0.02)
−0.04
(0.06)
0.02
(0.06)
0.03
(0.06)
0.12∗
(0.06)
−0.05
(0.04)
−0.13∗∗
(0.04)
−0.13∗∗
(0.04)
−0.24∗∗∗
(0.04)
0.01
(0.02)
0.01
(0.03)
−0.18∗∗
(0.06)
Table continued
M1
M2
Country level
Democracy
Communist regime experience
M3
M3b
M4
−0.34∗∗
(0.13)
−0.86∗∗∗
(0.24)
−0.34∗∗
(0.13)
−1.12∗∗∗
(0.26)
0.01∗∗
(0.00)
−0.43∗∗
(0.15)
−0.74∗∗
(0.23)
Age X Communist regime exp.
−0.01
(0.04)
0.10
(0.09)
−0.01
(0.01)
0.00
(0.01)
−0.10
(0.17)
−1.08∗∗
(0.33)
Ln population
Ln GDP per Capita
Redistribution (reduction gross
to disposable income inequality)
Disposable income inequality
Recent democratization
(after 1989)
Ethnic fractionalization
Polity 2 (Anocracy)
Polity 3 (Democracy)
Democracy X Redist. (gross
to disposable income inequality)
Democracy X Disposable
income inequality
Intercept
AIC
Log Likelihood
Number of observations
Number of groups
∗∗∗
−1.18∗∗∗
(0.10)
116560.77
-58268.38
110064
71
−1.09∗∗∗
(0.10)
113428.03
-56699.01
106743
70
−0.83∗∗∗
(0.13)
111885.07
-55925.53
105640
69
−0.82∗∗∗
(0.13)
111879.94
-55921.97
105640
69
−0.91
(1.14)
76667.08
-38310.54
72576
46
M4b
M4c
M5
M5b
−0.71∗∗
(0.22)
−0.29
(0.68)
−0.74∗∗
(0.23)
−0.47∗∗
(0.16)
−0.95∗∗∗
(0.24)
−0.91∗∗∗
(0.24)
−0.01
(0.04)
0.10
(0.09)
0.00
(0.02)
0.00
(0.01)
−0.10
(0.17)
−1.04∗∗
(0.34)
0.01
(0.04)
0.15∗
(0.07)
0.02
(0.04)
0.21∗∗
(0.07)
0.09
(0.18)
−0.41
(0.30)
0.05
(0.16)
−0.35
(0.30)
0.08
(0.20)
−0.49∗∗
(0.18)
−0.01
(0.02)
−0.00
(0.02)
−0.93
(1.14)
76670.79
-38310.39
72576
46
−2.10∗
(0.99)
108407.24
-54182.62
101958
66
−2.87∗∗
(0.97)
106948.36
-53452.18
100878
65
0.02
(0.04)
0.13
(0.09)
−0.01
(0.01)
0.01
(0.01)
−0.10
(0.16)
−1.03∗∗
(0.33)
0.31
(0.24)
−0.36
(0.19)
−1.86
(1.21)
76665.39
-38308.69
72576
46
p < 0.001, ∗∗ p < 0.01, ∗ p < 0.05.
Random intercept logistic regression with individuals scoring 1 on “democratic redistributionist" measure (based on the median and on the seven
common items of WVS waves 5 and 6) as dependent variable. All independent variables are measured in 2005. The reference categories for the set
of class dummies is “upper class", whereas “low" is the reference category for both the education and income dummies.