Cited by 450Political Conflict and GovernanceMemory, violence, and historyCorruption and Economic Development

An Empirical Evaluation of Explanations for State Repression

HILL, DANIEL W., JONES, ZACHARY M.·2014·American Political Science Review

Abstract

The empirical literature that examines cross-national patterns of state repression seeks to discover a set of political, economic, and social conditions that are consistently associated with government violations of human rights. Null hypothesis significance testing is the most common way of examining the relationship between repression and concepts of interest, but we argue that it is inadequate for this goal, and has produced potentially misleading results. To remedy this deficiency in the literature we use cross-validation and random forests to determine the predictive power of measures of concepts the literature identifies as important causes of repression. We find that few of these measures are able to substantially improve the predictive power of statistical models of repression. Further, the most studied concept in the literature, democratic political institutions, predicts certain kinds of repression much more accurately than others. We argue that this is due to conceptual and operational overlap between democracy and certain kinds of state repression. Finally, we argue that the impressive performance of certain features of domestic legal systems, as well as some economic and demographic factors, justifies a stronger focus on these concepts in future studies of repression.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1017/s0003055414000306

Cites

159 of 159 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Lower levels of income and population density can shape patterns of resistance and therefore the level of domestic repression at home.

    “Studies have shown that factors like lower levels of income and population density can shape patterns of resistance and therefore the level of domestic repression at home (Hill and Jones 2014).”
  • Prior research has found that the openness of legal institutions helps to predict traditional repression.

    “Prior research has found that the openness of legal institutions helps to predict traditional repression (179).”

    From Physical and virtual repertoires of contention (2022) · cites this paper as [179]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
HILL, D. W., & JONES, Z. M.
Affiliations
  • University of Georgia (US)
  • Pennsylvania State University (US)
Corresponding author
  • HILL, DANIEL W.
  • JONES, ZACHARY M.
Venue
American Political Science Review
Published
2014-08
Volume
108
Issue
3
Pages
661-687
ISSN
  • 0003-0554 (ISSN-L)
  • 1537-5943
OpenAlex
W2128433189
Cited by
450
References
159
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 35 · 2024: 54 · 2023: 49 · 2022: 41 · 2021: 47 · 2020: 67 · 2019: 31 · 2018: 50 · 2017: 21 · 2016: 21 · 2015: 18 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 1
FWCI
71.37
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • American Political Science Review (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Political Conflict and Governance
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Memory, violence, and history
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Corruption and Economic Development
Keywords
state repression, human rights violations, null hypothesis significance testing, cross-validation, random forest, predictive power, conceptual overlap, national legal systems, cross-country analysis

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review