Pitfalls in the Study of Democratization: Testing the Emancipatory Theory of Democracy

Pitfalls in the Study of Democratization: Testing the Emancipatory Theory of Democracy
复制标题

民主化研究的陷阱:检验民主的解放理论

DOI:
10.1017/s0007123415000605
复制
发表时间:
2015
影响因子:
5
通讯作者:
S. Kruse
S. Kruse
中科院分区:
法学1区
文献类型:
--
作者:
Welzel;R. Inglehart ;S. Kruse

文献摘要

参考文献

被引文献

相似文献

在这个问题上,Dahlum和Knutsen(D & K)声称反驳Inglehart和Welzel(I & W)提出的民主解放理论。[1]这一理论认为,对普遍自由的日益重视,或I & W所称的"解放价值观",是推动民主出现和生存的主要力量。为了支持他们的说法,D & K将国家得分归因于解放价值观多年来缺乏真实的数据。2这些估算使他们能够产生一个时间序列横截面数据库,其中包括大约2 000个国家年的观测数据。3对这些数据进行小组回归分析,D & K发现,人口在某一年对解放价值观的强调对其下一年的民主水平没有影响。D & K认为,这一结果使I & W的理论无效,在这种情况下,人口的价值观与是否实现和维持民主无关。我们感谢这一贡献,因为它提供了一个很好的机会来查明TSCS框架的一些缺陷。为此,我们分三步进行。首先,我们描述的问题与TSCS数据在概念上,然后我们说明了这个问题的模拟,最后我们证明了什么真实的数据说I & W的理论。我们的结论是,证据支持民主的解放理论,因为它在I & W的原始分析有力。
In this issue, Dahlum and Knutsen (D&K) claim to disprove the emancipatory theory of democracy proposed by Inglehart and Welzel (I&W). 1 This theory posits that rising emphasis on universal freedoms, or what I&W call ‘emancipative values’, is a major force driving the emergence and survival of democracy.To support their claim, D&K impute country scores to emancipative values for years in which real data are absent. 2 These imputations allow them to produce a time-series cross-sectional (TSCS) database, consisting of some 2,000 country-year observations. 3 Running panel regressions over these data, D&K find that a population’s emphasis on emancipative values in a given year has no effect on its level of democracy in the next year. D&K believe that this result invalidates I&W’s theory, in which case the values of a population are irrelevant for whether it attains and sustains democracy. We appreciate this contribution because it provides a welcome opportunity to pinpoint some pitfalls of TSCS frameworks. To do so, we proceed in three steps. First, we describe the problem with TSCS data in conceptual terms; then we illustrate the problem with a simulation; finally we demonstrate what real data say about I&W’s theory. We conclude that the evidence supports the emancipatory theory of democracy as powerfully as it did in I&W’s original analyses.
不平等与民主化
DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.1144087
发表时间: 2008
期刊: Democratization: Building States & Democratic Processes eJournal
影响因子: --
作者:
Ben W. Ansell;David J. Samuels
通讯作者: David J. Samuels
现代化、文化变革和民主
DOI: 10.5860/choice.42-3041
发表时间: 2005
期刊: Democratization
影响因子: 3.2
作者:
Welzel Christian;F. Ronald
通讯作者: F. Ronald
使用基于代理的模拟和数据测试和修订人类发展序列理论
DOI: --
发表时间: 2015
期刊:
影响因子: --
作者:
V. Spaiser;D. Sumpter
通讯作者: D. Sumpter
全基因分析检测到阿尔茨海默氏病的两个新的易感基因。
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0094661
发表时间: 2014
期刊: PloS one
影响因子: 3.7
作者:
Escott-Price V;Bellenguez C;Wang LS;Choi SH;Harold D;Jones L;Holmans P;Gerrish A;Vedernikov A;Richards A;DeStefano AL;Lambert JC;Ibrahim-Verbaas CA;Naj AC;Sims R;Jun G;Bis JC;Beecham GW;Grenier-Boley B;Russo G;Thornton-Wells TA;Denning N;Smith AV;Chouraki V;Thomas C;Ikram MA;Zelenika D;Vardarajan BN;Kamatani Y;Lin CF;Schmidt H;Kunkle B;Dunstan ML;Vronskaya M;United Kingdom Brain Expression Consortium;Johnson AD;Ruiz A;Bihoreau MT;Reitz C;Pasquier F;Hollingworth P;Hanon O;Fitzpatrick AL;Buxbaum JD;Campion D;Crane PK;Baldwin C;Becker T;Gudnason V;Cruchaga C;Craig D;Amin N;Berr C;Lopez OL;De Jager PL;Deramecourt V;Johnston JA;Evans D;Lovestone S;Letenneur L;Hernández I;Rubinsztein DC;Eiriksdottir G;Sleegers K;Goate AM;Fiévet N;Huentelman MJ;Gill M;Brown K;Kamboh MI;Keller L;Barberger-Gateau P;McGuinness B;Larson EB;Myers AJ;Dufouil C;Todd S;Wallon D;Love S;Rogaeva E;Gallacher J;George-Hyslop PS;Clarimon J;Lleo A;Bayer A;Tsuang DW;Yu L;Tsolaki M;Bossù P;Spalletta G;Proitsi P;Collinge J;Sorbi S;Garcia FS;Fox NC;Hardy J;Naranjo MC;Bosco P;Clarke R;Brayne C;Galimberti D;Scarpini E;Bonuccelli U;Mancuso M;Siciliano G;Moebus S;Mecocci P;Zompo MD;Maier W;Hampel H;Pilotto A;Frank-García A;Panza F;Solfrizzi V;Caffarra P;Nacmias B;Perry W;Mayhaus M;Lannfelt L;Hakonarson H;Pichler S;Carrasquillo MM;Ingelsson M;Beekly D;Alvarez V;Zou F;Valladares O;Younkin SG;Coto E;Hamilton-Nelson KL;Gu W;Razquin C;Pastor P;Mateo I;Owen MJ;Faber KM;Jonsson PV;Combarros O;O'Donovan MC;Cantwell LB;Soininen H;Blacker D;Mead S;Mosley TH Jr;Bennett DA;Harris TB;Fratiglioni L;Holmes C;de Bruijn RF;Passmore P;Montine TJ;Bettens K;Rotter JI;Brice A;Morgan K;Foroud TM;Kukull WA;Hannequin D;Powell JF;Nalls MA;Ritchie K;Lunetta KL;Kauwe JS;Boerwinkle E;Riemenschneider M;Boada M;Hiltunen M;Martin ER;Schmidt R;Rujescu D;Dartigues JF;Mayeux R;Tzourio C;Hofman A;Nöthen MM;Graff C;Psaty BM;Haines JL;Lathrop M;Pericak-Vance MA;Launer LJ;Van Broeckhoven C;Farrer LA;van Duijn CM;Ramirez A;Seshadri S;Schellenberg GD;Amouyel P;Williams J;Cardiovascular Health Study (CHS)
通讯作者: Cardiovascular Health Study (CHS)
民主,发展和文化价值观的动力。
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0097856
发表时间: 2014
期刊: PloS one
影响因子: 3.7
作者:
Spaiser V;Ranganathan S;Mann RP;Sumpter DJ
通讯作者: Sumpter DJ