The DOI matches its Crossref record; 85 of the 85 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; 3 of the 68 sources its claims cite were checked for support.
The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross‐National Analysis
Open accessAbstract
Religion provides an important basis for social integration and the prevention of deviant behavior, such as tax fraud, a crime that costs society billions of dollars in lost revenue. The literature on tax fraud and tax fraud acceptability (TFA) has neglected religiosity as a social bond that may deter this type of behavior. Furthermore, existing work is based on the United States; there are no systematic cross‐national studies. In particular, there is no research exploring the “moral communities” hypothesis that religiosity's effect on deviance will vary according to the strength of national moral communities. The present study addresses these two gaps in the literature by analyzing data on 45,728 individuals in 36 nations from the World Values Surveys. We control for other predictors of TFA, including social bonds, economic strain, and demographic factors. The results determined that the higher the individual's level of religiosity, the lower the TFA. Results on the moral community's hypothesis were mixed. However, in a separate analysis of individual nations, the presence of a “moral community” (majority of the population identifies with a religious group) explained 39 percent of the variation in the presence or absence of the expected religiosity‐TFA relationship. Furthermore, the presence of a communist regime in a nation, often known for the oppression of religious groups who then may view the regime as illegitimate, diminished the impact of religion on TFA.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
73 Own result · 28 No basis given · 22 No full text of the sources · 19 Own interpretation · 14 Sources not found · 11 Not checked yet · 7 Own method · 3 Partly supported · accuracy not yet measured
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“The vast majority of papers have found an inverse association-the greater the individual-level religiosity, the lower the risk of deviant behavior (see Agnew 1998;Baier and Wright 2001;Tittle and Welch 1983).”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > Abstract
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites Agnew 1998 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Stage 2: Final Regression Results section says previous studies usually found an inverse relationship between religious measures and suicide approval, and this study finds similar associations. But the cited paper addresses approval of suicide, not the risk of deviant behavior generally; it does not establish the claim about the vast majority of papers across that broader topic. Page numbers are unavailable in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.86)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Baier and Wright 2001 source
- Not matchedcites Tittle and Welch 1983
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Partly supported
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Furthermore, the presence of a communist regime in a nation, often known for the oppression of religious groups who then may view the regime as illegitimate, diminished the impact of religion on TFA.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > Abstract
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The results determined that the higher the individual's level of religiosity, the lower the TFA.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > Abstract
plaincorrelationaln = 45,728- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, in a separate analysis of individual nations, the presence of a”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > Abstract
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Results on the moral community's hypothesis were mixed.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > Abstract
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In fact, our results were largely unaffected by the selection of the ritual measure versus the intrinsic measure of religiousness.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > Individual-Level Religion Measures
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The means for church attendance ranged from 0.12 in China to a high of 4.77 in Ireland.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > Hierarchical Linear Models (HLM)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“For example, 75 percent of Austrians report affiliations with the Catholic Church.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > Part II: Individual Nation Analysis
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“From the odds ratio, nations having homogeneous moral communities are 5.46 times more apt than those lacking such communities to exhibit a significant negative association between religiosity and TFA.”
- Also stated in: § DISCUSSION · hedged
“nations with at least 50 percent of their people with a homogenous affiliation, or single faith, were also more likely to exhibit the expected negative association.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > Part II: Individual Nation Analysis
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Also stated in: § DISCUSSION · hedged
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Respondents who found comfort in religion were considerably less likely to support tax fraud (b = -303, t = -11.07).”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > TABLE 2 ANALYSIS OF RANDOM EFFECTS: THE UNCONDITIONAL MEANS MODEL
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Work status was unrelated to tax fraud acceptability.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > TABLE 2 ANALYSIS OF RANDOM EFFECTS: THE UNCONDITIONAL MEANS MODEL
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“the expected significant negative association emerged under controls for confidence in government and the other independent variables.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > Part II: Individual Nation Analysis
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: In Nigeria, the Muslim majority's domination of government lowers confidence in government for the Christian minority.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“None of them reached statistical significance by conventional criteria.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > TABLE 2 ANALYSIS OF RANDOM EFFECTS: THE UNCONDITIONAL MEANS MODEL
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Turning to the results on social bonds, the lower the level of confidence in the political system, the higher the degree of TFA.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > TABLE 2 ANALYSIS OF RANDOM EFFECTS: THE UNCONDITIONAL MEANS MODEL
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Most of the 11 communist nations in the sample did not exhibit the expected negative association between religious attendance and TFA.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > Communist Nations, Religion, and TFA
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Panel B presents the correlations for the 12 of 37 nations that did not exhibit a significant association between attendance and TFA.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > Part II: Individual Nation Analysis
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Persons with little or no confidence in the government (political confidence) were much more likely to support tax fraud than those with a great deal of confidence.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > TABLE 2 ANALYSIS OF RANDOM EFFECTS: THE UNCONDITIONAL MEANS MODEL
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Married individuals were less likely to approve tax fraud.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > TABLE 2 ANALYSIS OF RANDOM EFFECTS: THE UNCONDITIONAL MEANS MODEL
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“As observed in the unconditional means model earlier, results here show that even after including explanatory variables there was within-country variation in tax fraud acceptance.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > TABLE 2 ANALYSIS OF RANDOM EFFECTS: THE UNCONDITIONAL MEANS MODEL
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Removing the variance between nations, and using the frequency of attendance at religious services as the Level 2 variable, grouplevel religiosity had no bearing on individual-level TFA.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > DISCUSSION
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The moral community measure remains a significant predictor of finding the expected relationship.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > Part II: Individual Nation Analysis
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“It means that 8.9 percent of the total variance (in tax fraud) can be explained by cluster (country) membership.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > TABLE 2 ANALYSIS OF RANDOM EFFECTS: THE UNCONDITIONAL MEANS MODEL
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The greater the financial dissatisfaction, the higher tax fraud acceptance.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > TABLE 2 ANALYSIS OF RANDOM EFFECTS: THE UNCONDITIONAL MEANS MODEL
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The model explains about 31 percent of the variance.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > Part II: Individual Nation Analysis
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Persons who said that they did not know and those with missing information were also less likely to accept tax fraud (b = -107, t = -2.95).”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > TABLE 2 ANALYSIS OF RANDOM EFFECTS: THE UNCONDITIONAL MEANS MODEL
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“From the odds ratio, nations marked by a moral community are fully 26.8 times more likely to have the expected negative association between TFA and religiosity.”
- Also stated in: § DISCUSSION · plain
“Nations with at least 50 percent of their population affiliated with any religion were significantly more likely to exhibit a significant and negative association between individual-level attendance and TFA.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > Part II: Individual Nation Analysis
plaincorrelationaln = 37 ·- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Also stated in: § DISCUSSION · plain
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In addition, the variables introduced tremendous instability into the analysis due to multicollinear inefficiencies.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > TABLE 2 ANALYSIS OF RANDOM EFFECTS: THE UNCONDITIONAL MEANS MODEL
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Panel C lists a single nation, the former Soviet satellite Belarus, which exhibited a significant positive association between religiosity and TFA.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > Part II: Individual Nation Analysis
plaincorrelationalSingle case ·- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Financial dissatisfaction increased tax fraud acceptability.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > TABLE 2 ANALYSIS OF RANDOM EFFECTS: THE UNCONDITIONAL MEANS MODEL
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“From the odds ratio (0.09), communist nations were 91 percent (1 -0.09) less apt than noncommunist nations to have a significant, negative association between religiosity and TFA.”
- Also stated in: § Communist Nations, Religion, and TFA · plain
“Communist nations were fully 81 percent less apt than other nations to be marked by the anticipated association: the greater the religiosity the lower the TFA.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > Part II: Individual Nation Analysis
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Also stated in: § Communist Nations, Religion, and TFA · plain
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The model explains 42 percent of the variance.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > Part II: Individual Nation Analysis
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“This low level is considerably lower than that found in European nations.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > Eastern Religions
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, for Japan, even intrinsic religiosity was unrelated to TFA.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > Eastern Religions
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“No differences were observed between Hindus, Jews, Muslims, other denominations, and Protestants.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > TABLE 2 ANALYSIS OF RANDOM EFFECTS: THE UNCONDITIONAL MEANS MODEL
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Married persons were less likely to approve tax fraud than nonmarried persons.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > TABLE 2 ANALYSIS OF RANDOM EFFECTS: THE UNCONDITIONAL MEANS MODEL
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Intrinsic religiosity was a significant predictor of TFA in India as well.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > Eastern Religions
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“As may be seen in Model 3 (Table 4), religious persons were significantly less likely than the nonreligious to approve tax fraud (b = -0.292,t = -10.64).”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > TABLE 2 ANALYSIS OF RANDOM EFFECTS: THE UNCONDITIONAL MEANS MODEL
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In two-thirds of the nations, or 24 of 37, the negative association between attendance and TFA holds at the bivariate level.”
- Also stated in: § DISCUSSION · plain
“Correlations between TFA and attendance were negative and significant in 24 of 37 nations.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > Part II: Individual Nation Analysis
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Also stated in: § DISCUSSION · plain
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Nations with moral communities are 11.85 times more likely than those lacking a moral community to have a negative association between religiosity and TFA.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > Part II: Individual Nation Analysis
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“While there was no zero-order association between religious service attendance and TFA in Nigeria”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > Part II: Individual Nation Analysis
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Analyses using alternative measures of a moral community in HLM models were largely negative.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > DISCUSSION
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The model explains 19 percent of the variance.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > Part II: Individual Nation Analysis
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Individual-level church attendance significantly reduced attitudes in favor of tax fraud (b = -0.074,t = -11.41).”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > TABLE 2 ANALYSIS OF RANDOM EFFECTS: THE UNCONDITIONAL MEANS MODEL
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Individuals with unknown or missing confidence were also more in favor of tax fraud.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > TABLE 2 ANALYSIS OF RANDOM EFFECTS: THE UNCONDITIONAL MEANS MODEL
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“A 1 percent increase in religious adherents increased the odds of finding a significant negative association between religiosity and TFA by 3 percent.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > Part II: Individual Nation Analysis
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“When separate analyses were run for two subpopulations: religious affiliates and religious nonaffiliates, the slopes for the equation for the religious affiliates were significantly larger than those for the nonaffiliates.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > DISCUSSION
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The full-time employed were less likely to approve tax cheating compared to unemployed individuals.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > TABLE 2 ANALYSIS OF RANDOM EFFECTS: THE UNCONDITIONAL MEANS MODEL
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Further examination using variance inflation factors (in OLS) and also bivariate correlational analysis revealed that the country-level variables were highly correlated with denomination at the individual level.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > TABLE 2 ANALYSIS OF RANDOM EFFECTS: THE UNCONDITIONAL MEANS MODEL
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Most are in Panels B and C (Belarus, Bulgaria, China, Hungary, Latvia, Moscow, Poland, and Russia).”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > Part II: Individual Nation Analysis
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, only 23 percent of the variance was explained.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > Part II: Individual Nation Analysis
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“National religiosity level did not reach statistical significance by conventional criteria.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > TABLE 2 ANALYSIS OF RANDOM EFFECTS: THE UNCONDITIONAL MEANS MODEL
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This was significantly related to explaining the presence of a negative association between religiosity and TFA in a nation.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > Part II: Individual Nation Analysis
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, and members of the Orthodox church were less likely to support tax fraud compared to Protestants.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > TABLE 2 ANALYSIS OF RANDOM EFFECTS: THE UNCONDITIONAL MEANS MODEL
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Even after important controls are incorporated for factors such as confidence in the government and financial satisfaction, the greater the individual religiosity, the lower the approval of tax fraud.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > Communist Nations, Religion, and TFA
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Confidence in government, in particular, was a strong predictor of TFA.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > Communist Nations, Religion, and TFA
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“persons with no religious affiliation were typically the group that approved the most of TFA.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > Eastern Religions and TFA
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Members of Orthodox churches tended to be less approving of tax fraud than their Protestant counterparts.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > Eastern Religions and TFA
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, Hindus and Muslims were not significantly different from Protestants in level of TFA.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > Eastern Religions and TFA
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“There was no difference in the attitudes toward tax fraud between Jews and Protestants.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > Eastern Religions and TFA
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Individuals who are highly confident in the regime were significantly less approving of tax fraud.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > Communist Nations, Religion, and TFA
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Buddhists were more approving of tax fraud than Protestants.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > Eastern Religions and TFA
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“All three measures of individual religiosity (attendance, religious identification, finding comfort in religion) were powerful predictors of TFA.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > Communist Nations, Religion, and TFA
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In the Level 1 analysis, the present results suggest that religiosity is one of the most important correlates of TFA.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > Communist Nations, Religion, and TFA
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Catholics were significantly more approving of tax fraud than Protestants.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > Eastern Religions and TFA
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“For example, county-level suicide rates (which count the suicides of both adherents and nonadherents) are lower in counties with strong moral communities (Pescosolido 1990;Regnerus 2003:526).”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > Level 2 Explanations: The Moral Community Hypothesis
What the sources say
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“A search through online databases (sociological abstracts, criminal justice abstracts) and other sources uncovered only five studies on tax fraud that included a measure of religiosity (Grasmick, Bursik, and Cochran 1991;Grasmick, Kinsey, and Cochran 1991;Patee, Milner, and Welch 1994;Tittle and Welch 1983;Welch, Tittle, and Patee 1991).”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > Studies on Religion and Tax Fraud
What the sources say
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“Third, almost all of the relevant studies are limited to juveniles (e.g., Baier and Wright 2001;Regnerus 2003).”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > Abstract
What the sources say
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Communities with a strong moral community may be expected to reduce the deviant attitudes and behavior of individuals in them regardless of the individuals' own level of religiosity (Regnerus 2003:524).”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > Level 2 Explanations: The Moral Community Hypothesis
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Regnerus 2003 source
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Fourth, major categories of deviance have been neglected, including violent crime and white-collar crime.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > Abstract
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“First, the overwhelming majority of studies fail to test the moral communities hypothesis that holds that individual-level religiosity will have the strongest effect on deviance when individual-level religiosity is reinforced by a high level of religiosity in the community (Baier and Wright 2001;Regnerus 2003;Stark 1996).”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > Abstract
What the sources say
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Because tax fraud acceptability (TFA) has been linked to reported tax fraud in essentially all of the past relevant investigations on the subject, we anticipated that factors related to tax fraud acceptability would be predictive of reported tax fraud behavior.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > Attitudes and Behavior
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Fifth, researchers have focused on the influence of religiosity on behavior to the neglect of religion's effect on attitudes toward deviant behavior.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > Abstract
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Two key controls are typically omitted from all of the existing studies on tax fraud and religion-familial and political bonds.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > Model Specification Problems in Past Research
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“For example, measures of individual-level religiosity generally correlate in the r = 0.92 to r = 0.98 range in the European nations (Halman and Petersson 2003:62-63).”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > Individual-Level Religion Measures
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Halman and Petersson 2003:62-63
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
In the paper
“Group-level religiosity was also related to projected tax fraud.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > Studies on Religion and Tax Fraud
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Welch, Tittle, and Patee 1991
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In view of the different sources of variation and the possible impact of national character, ordinary least squares regression may not give accurate results of the effects of religiosity and other independent variables on tax fraud.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > Hierarchical Linear Models (HLM)
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Hence, studies restricted to church members were more likely than their counterparts to find a strong impact of religion on criminality.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > Meta-Analysis of Moral Community Effects
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Baier and Wright 2001 source
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“A technique that simultaneously accounts for the hierarchically structured nature of the data is more likely to give reliable parameter estimates.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > Hierarchical Linear Models (HLM)
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: unclear — It is unclear whether it could be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The World Values Survey constitutes clustered or hierarchical data.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > Hierarchical Linear Models (HLM)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“Available research indicates that tax fraud acceptability is a significant and often powerful predictor of reported tax fraud (Spicer and Lundstedt 1976;Varma and Doob 1998).”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > Tax Fraud: The Link Between Attitudes and Behavior
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Spicer and Lundstedt 1976
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Varma and Doob 1998 source
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“The World Values Surveys have been regarded as one of the few databases from which investigations can draw sound cross-national comparisons of religious variables (Froese and Pfaff 2001:503-04).”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > METHODS
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Froese and Pfaff 2001:503-04 source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“In contrast, in the other investigation, which used the same data set but different measures of key variables, individual-level religiosity was negatively related to projected or future tax fraud (Welch, Tittle, and Patee 1991).”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > Studies on Religion and Tax Fraud
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Welch, Tittle, and Patee 1991
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“However, many beliefs (e.g., even the belief in God as a creator of the universe) are not shared by all the world's religions (e.g., Smith 1991;Toropov and Buckles 2002).”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > Individual-Level Religion Measures
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Smith 1991
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Toropov and Buckles 2002
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The past research, while measuring objective social class status, does not control for perceived or subjective economic strain.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > Model Specification Problems in Past Research
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“However, a multiplicative term measuring the interaction between individual-and parish-level religiosity, or their joint effect on tax fraud, was insignificant.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > Studies on Religion and Tax Fraud
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Welch, Tittle, and Patee 1991
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“In the area of deviant behavior there is considerable evidence that attitudes favoring deviance are predictive of actual deviant behavior.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > ATTITUDES AND DEVIANT BEHAVIOR
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In all of these studies, both ones testing Level 1 and Level 2 models, the impact of religiosity may have been overstated due to lack of controls for possible covariates of religiosity.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > Model Specification Problems in Past Research
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The bilevel models automatically remove variance in TFA that is based on between-nation variance.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > National Residence
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Family life is often a close covariate of religion as religious people are more bonded to family life than their counterparts (e.g., Stack 1985).”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > Model Specification Problems in Past Research
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Stack 1985 source
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The present study includes controls for these neglected possible confounding factors.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > Model Specification Problems in Past Research
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“However, the reported direction of this interaction did not support the moral communities hypothesis.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > Meta-Analysis of Moral Community Effects
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Tittle and Welch 1983
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The significant variance components offer support for the national character argument, at least in the case of TFA.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > ANALYSIS Part I. Hierarchical Linear Models
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The two investigations by Patee and his colleagues, while having the advantage of being based on national samples, were both limited to Catholics.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > Meta-Analysis of Moral Community Effects
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“In the case of 1,908 Canadian taxpayers, Varma and Doob (1998) found that the greater the acceptability of tax evasion the greater the tendency to have cheated on taxes.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > Tax Fraud: The Link Between Attitudes and Behavior
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Varma and Doob 1998 source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“These results, together with those from Columns 1 and 2 of Table 6, suggest that the dichotomous heterogeneous conceptualization of a moral community provides the best fit for explaining the deviant cases in Table 5.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > Part II: Individual Nation Analysis
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Religiosity may have little bearing on such behavior, in this case TFA.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > Eastern Religions
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: Japanese culture places a high value on lawfulness.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Furthermore, it has never been tested at the level of the nation-state for a set of nations with varied institutional and cultural contexts.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > DISCUSSION
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The results have not been consistent; some found evidence for a moral communities effect while some did not.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > DISCUSSION
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Baier and Wright determined that studies based on church members were more apt to find stronger associations between individual-level religiosity and deviance.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > DISCUSSION
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Baier and Wright (2001) source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“We found some supporting evidence for the moral communities hypothesis if we follow the methodology of Baier and Wright (2001).”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > TABLE 2 ANALYSIS OF RANDOM EFFECTS: THE UNCONDITIONAL MEANS MODEL
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Baier and Wright 2001 source
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: A nation's mean level of attendance at religious services measures the presence of a moral community.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Several analyses, then, offered support for variants of the moral communities hypothesis.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > DISCUSSION
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“When cultural norms strongly condemn a deviant behavior, there may be little variation left to be explained by other factors.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > Eastern Religions
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
In the paper
“The studies in Baier and Wright (2001) were all based on samples from one nation, the United States.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > DISCUSSION
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Baier and Wright (2001) source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Hence, the present investigation allows us to generalize this finding to a larger set of nations.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > DISCUSSION
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“The previous work on the influence of moral communities on the specific problem of tax fraud has been sparse, consisting only of three American-based investigations (Patee, Milner, and Welch 1994;Tittle and Welch 1983;Welch, Tittle, and Patee 1991).”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > DISCUSSION
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Patee, Milner, and Welch 1994
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Tittle and Welch 1983
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Welch, Tittle, and Patee 1991
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“These findings suggest that the hypothesis can be applied to the nation-state as the unit of analysis.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > DISCUSSION
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Hence, the lack of religion is perhaps the key promoter of a culture favorable to tax fraud.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > Eastern Religions and TFA
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The results of the impact of religion on deviant behavior and attitudes may be stronger for research done on adult samples.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > Eastern Religions and TFA
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: Young people's religiosity is forced upon them to some extent.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“However, a review of treatises on comparative religion did not yield any apparent major differences in the religious teachings against theft among these religions (Coward, Dargyay, and Neufeldt 1988;Halman and Riis 2003;Juergensmeyer 2003;Parringder 1971;Renard 2004;Smith 1991;Toropov and Buckles 2002;Zaehner 1988).”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > Eastern Religions and TFA
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Coward, Dargyay, and Neufeldt 1988
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Halman and Riis 2003
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Juergensmeyer 2003
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
- Probably not a substantial claim. 39
- It may state two separate claims as one. 33
- The quote only partly states this claim. 1
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Women are generally more conservative in their beliefs and attitudes regarding the acceptability of deviance (e.g., Agnew 1998;Stack 1998).”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > Control Variables
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites Agnew 1998 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Social Control section reports that men tend to be more approving of suicide than women, although sex differences are typically slight. That supports a narrower claim about one form of deviance, not the broader claim that women are generally more conservative about the acceptability of deviance. (LLM, conf=0.84)
- Not matchedcites Stack 1998
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Partly supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“National character, or the average personality type in a nation, has often been shown to be associated with such variables as happiness and depression (e.g., Inglehart 1990;Inkeles 1990;Stack and Eshelman 1998).”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > National Residence
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Inglehart 1990 source
- Partly supportedcites Inkeles 1990 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
In “The happiness of nations” (page unavailable), Inkeles treats stable national differences in self-reported happiness as a possible national-character trait and suggests links with child-rearing values. The paper does not establish an association with clinical depression or show that associations with both outcomes have often been demonstrated; its mention of “economic depression” refers to economic conditions. (LLM, conf=0.84)
- Not matchedcites Stack and Eshelman 1998
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Because parameter estimates remained virtually unchanged following mean substitution, the latter model was maintained.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > Missing Data
plainn = 545- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The results for this preliminary analysis, using a relatively crude measure high-low index of national religiosity, were essentially the same as those reported here.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > Hierarchical Linear Models (HLM)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“As Panel A shows, the covariance parameter estimates (random effects) are both statistically significant.The variance component between countries is 0.479 (z = 4.19, p < 0.000), and that within countries is 4.882 (z = 154.57,p < 0.000).”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > ANALYSIS Part I. Hierarchical Linear Models
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In the present case, for example, OLS results (not presented) showed that the effect of Catholic denomination was not significant (b = 0.044, t = 1.34).In contrast, in mixed modeling that incorporated country variation, the effect of Catholic denomination was significant (b = 0.105, t = 2.56).”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > ANALYSIS Part I. Hierarchical Linear Models
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Similarly, while full-time employment had no significant impact on tax fraud acceptability in the OLS regression (-0.082, t = -1.51), it was significant in the mixed model analysis (b = 0.131, t = -2.45).”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > ANALYSIS Part I. Hierarchical Linear Models
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Results in it were equivalent to estimation done with OLS in terms of significant parameters.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > TABLE 2 ANALYSIS OF RANDOM EFFECTS: THE UNCONDITIONAL MEANS MODEL
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Denominational differences continued, with Catholics, Buddhists, and no denominations supporting tax fraud, and Orthodox opposing it.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > TABLE 2 ANALYSIS OF RANDOM EFFECTS: THE UNCONDITIONAL MEANS MODEL
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Since Protestants constitute only 32 percent of the respondents in the survey, there is an absence of a homogeneous moral community in the United States.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > Part II: Individual Nation Analysis
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“TABLE 5 THE BIVARIATE CORRELATION BETWEEN RELIGIOSITY (CHURCH ATTENDANCE AND TAX FRAUD ACCEPTABILITY BY NATION Nation Bivariate Association (A) Nations with Significant, Negative Bivariate Associations Austria -0.114 * Belgium -0.176 Britain -0.216 * Brazil -0.074 * Canada -0.159 * Chile -0.064 * Denmark -0.114 * East Germany -0.089 * Finland -0.194 * France -0.124 * Iceland -0.120 * Ireland -0.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > Part II: Individual Nation Analysis
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Japan is a nation with a very low level of tax fraud acceptability (TFA = 1.45), being in the bottom two nations in TFA.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > Eastern Religions
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“These nations include essentially all of the better-developed, Western European nations (e.g., Britain, France, Norway, and West Germany) and the three nations from North America (Canada, Mexico, and the United States).”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > Part II: Individual Nation Analysis
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Catholics, Buddhists, and persons without religious affiliation were more likely to approve tax fraud, while Orthodox adherents were less likely.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > TABLE 2 ANALYSIS OF RANDOM EFFECTS: THE UNCONDITIONAL MEANS MODEL
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Both demographic controls were predictive of TFA, with females and older persons reporting lower TFA than their counterparts.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > TABLE 2 ANALYSIS OF RANDOM EFFECTS: THE UNCONDITIONAL MEANS MODEL
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Results on the measures of social bonds continued to demonstrate the salience of marriage and political bonds as predictive of TFA.Financial dissatisfaction continued to predict TFA.Older persons and women were less approving of tax fraud than their counterparts.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > TABLE 2 ANALYSIS OF RANDOM EFFECTS: THE UNCONDITIONAL MEANS MODEL
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This null finding was produced in two analyses: one using a dichotomous religious attendance variable (high vs. low attendance); and one using a continuous Level 2 variable, the mean level of attendance in each nation.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > DISCUSSION
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Catholics, Buddhists, and persons with no denomination were significantly more likely than Protestants to find tax fraud acceptable, while Orthodox respondents tended to disapprove.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > TABLE 2 ANALYSIS OF RANDOM EFFECTS: THE UNCONDITIONAL MEANS MODEL
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The reported odds ratio was reduced to 2.25 and the Wald chi-square statistic was not significant.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > Part II: Individual Nation Analysis
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“As Model 1 in the table shows, service attendance had a significant effect on tax fraud acceptability.The greater the individual-level church attendance, the lower the TFA.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > TABLE 2 ANALYSIS OF RANDOM EFFECTS: THE UNCONDITIONAL MEANS MODEL
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Those without denomination, persons with other (unspecified) denominations, and individuals whose denominational affiliation was unknown or missing were less likely to support tax fraud than Protestants.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > TABLE 2 ANALYSIS OF RANDOM EFFECTS: THE UNCONDITIONAL MEANS MODEL
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“As indicated by the two variance components in the table (intercept variance and residual), there was both between-country variation (intercept variance) in tax fraud acceptability and within-country (residual) variation.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > TABLE 2 ANALYSIS OF RANDOM EFFECTS: THE UNCONDITIONAL MEANS MODEL
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The logistic regression model explains about 39 percent of the variance in the dependent variable as reported by the Nagelkerke R 2 statistic.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > Part II: Individual Nation Analysis
plaincorrelationaln = 37- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The quote only partly states this claim.
In the paper
“For church members (those belonging to denominations), the coefficient on frequency of attendance at religious services was -0.080 (t = -11.84,p < 0.0001).A separate analysis for nonmembers yielded a coefficient of -0.041 (t = -2.18,p < 0.0293).A z-test was calculated for the difference in regression coefficients (Cohen 1981).The difference between the two groups was significant using a one-tailed”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > TABLE 2 ANALYSIS OF RANDOM EFFECTS: THE UNCONDITIONAL MEANS MODEL
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Cohen 1981
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In an analysis not reported here, differences between religious faiths in TFA became less noteworthy when religious nones were used as a benchmark instead of Protestants.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > Eastern Religions and TFA
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“There is essentially no published research on the influence of religiosity on tax fraud acceptability.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > PREVIOUS RESEARCH ON TAX FRAUD AND RELIGION
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Second, there is a dearth of cross-national investigations.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > Abstract
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In particular, there is no research exploring the”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > Abstract
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The literature on tax fraud and tax fraud acceptability (TFA) has neglected religiosity as a social bond that may deter this type of behavior.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > Abstract
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Herein the full effect of religiosity on crime will be felt only in areas that are marked by a relatively high level of aggregate religiosity.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > Level 2 Explanations: The Moral Community Hypothesis
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Durkheim 1961
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Stark 1996 source
plainconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
- Not matched
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Furthermore, existing work is based on the United States; there are no systematic cross-national studies.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > Abstract
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“To the extent that behavior and attitudes are mutually reinforcing in general (e.g., Bem 1970;Festinger 1964), and for deviant behavior in particular (e.g., Warr and Stafford 1991), a full picture of the role of religion in controlling crime and deviance needs to assess religion's affect on both attitudes and behavior.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > Abstract
What the sources say
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“A recent meta-analysis of 60 studies determined that the mean reported effect size was r = -0.12,indicating the greater the religiosity the less likely people are to engage in various crimes (Baier and Wright 2001).”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > Abstract
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Baier and Wright 2001 source
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We control for other predictors of TFA, including social bonds, economic strain, and demographic factors.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > Abstract
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
In the paper
“In Patee, Milner, and Welch (1994), the degree of an individual's ties to the parish was unrelated to the likelihood of having committed tax fraud.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > Studies on Religion and Tax Fraud
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Patee, Milner, and Welch 1994
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“To the extent that religious people were disproportionately bonded to the present political regime (e.g., had relatively high confidence in the federal government in Washington), a control for such political bonds might confound the relationship between religion and attitudes toward tax fraud.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > Model Specification Problems in Past Research
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
In the paper
“We use three additional measures of social bonds, relevant to past work on religion and deviance.Because the present study is based on an adult sample, bonds to marriage, work, and government are of special interest (e.g., Sampson and Laub 1992).”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > Control Variables
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Sampson and Laub 1992 source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Baier and Wright (2001) reported that studies based on Pacific samples did not have significantly different effect sizes from studies based elsewhere in the United States.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > Meta-Analysis of Moral Community Effects
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Baier and Wright 2001 source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Patee, Milner, and Welch (1994) found that the mean level of religious social ties in a parish was predictive of less tax fraud.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > Studies on Religion and Tax Fraud
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Patee, Milner, and Welch 1994
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
- Not matched
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“HLM techniques first remove variation in the dependent variable across Level 2 units (herein nations).National residence controls for variability in national character.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > National Residence
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“However, the research on suicide acceptability was based on relatively primitive statistical techniques (ordinary least squares; Stack 1998).”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > National Residence
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Stack 1998
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Hence, these two investigations are split on whether there is a Level 1 effect, but are consistent in their findings on a Level 2 effect.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > Studies on Religion and Tax Fraud
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“A clear implication of the finding is that using OLS to explain tax fraud in the World Values Survey would provide less accurate results because in OLS estimation the differentials that exist between countries are not taken into account, leading to the production of inefficient estimates or unreliable tests of statistical significance for some covariates.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > ANALYSIS Part I. Hierarchical Linear Models
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“There was skewness in the distribution of TFA (skewness = 2.58), which was resolved by transforming the data to a logarithmic variable (skewness < 1).”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > METHODS
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Although the relevant literature has not generally controlled for national character as a predictor of deviance, comparative research on suicide has done this for some years (e.g., Stack 1998).”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > National Residence
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Stack 1998
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Income could not be used to measure objective economic strain because there are substantial differences in the purchasing power of the national currencies in the 36 nations under study.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > Control Variables
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Hence, generally speaking, there is mixed support for the moral communities hypothesis in past research.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > Meta-Analysis of Moral Community Effects
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Because population size varies across countries, data were weighted to take into account differential probabilities of selection.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > METHODS
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Hence, Ireland was judged to have the strongest moral community on this measure while China had the weakest.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > Hierarchical Linear Models (HLM)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: A nation's mean level of attendance at religious services measures the presence of a moral community.
In the paper
“The first measure of a moral community is based on the religious heterogeneity meaning of moral community (Stark 1996).This is simply whether a nation has at least 50 percent of its population affiliating with any religion.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > Nation-Specific Analysis for the Moral Communities Hypothesis
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Stark 1996 source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
In the paper
“A control variable is introduced for economic strain, conceptualized as a gap between desired and actual economic outcomes (Agnew 1992).”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > Control Variables
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Agnew 1992 source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Grasmick, Bursik, and Cochran (1991) explored the influence of religious salience and church attendance on tax fraud in Oklahoma City.Both variables were significantly and negatively related to tax fraud at both the bivariate and multivariate levels of analysis.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > Studies on Religion and Tax Fraud
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Grasmick, Bursik, and Cochran 1991 source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“The most commonly used measure of religiosity in the literature on deviance is church attendance; thus we maximize comparability with past research on this first measure of religiosity (Baier and Wright 2001;Tittle and Welch 1983).”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > Individual-Level Religion Measures
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Baier and Wright 2001 source
- Not matchedcites Tittle and Welch 1983
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
In the paper
“A meta-analysis of 60 studies on religiosity and crime reported mixed results for the moral communities hypothesis (Baier and Wright 2001).”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > Meta-Analysis of Moral Community Effects
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Baier and Wright 2001 source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“In the case of suicide acceptability, there are substantial differences among nations in the level of suicide acceptability that remain after major covariates are controlled (Stack 1998).”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > National Residence
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Stack 1998
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“These estimates suggest that countries in the World Values Survey differ in their average tax fraud scores, but that there is even more variation among respondents within countries.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > ANALYSIS Part I. Hierarchical Linear Models
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Older generations are often more conservative in their attitudes on deviance (e.g., Stack 1998;Stack, Wasserman, and Kposowa 1994).”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > Control Variables
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Stack 1998
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Stack, Wasserman, and Kposowa 1994 source
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
In the paper
“A full 68 percent of Japanese say cheating on taxes is never justified compared to 49 percent of Europeans (Kisala 2003).”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > Eastern Religions
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Kisala 2003 source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“Work on both delinquency and suicide has often found conservative, or fundamentalist, Protestantism to be the best predictor of low deviant behavior (e.g., Pescosolido 1990;Regnerus 2003).”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > DISCUSSION
What the sources say
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“the moral community hypothesis has seldom been tested in the area of deviant behavior.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > DISCUSSION
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Although most have found that individual-level religiosity tends to reduce reported tax fraud”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > DISCUSSION
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Approximately 80 percent of the former communist nations are in a state of religious revival (e.g., Froese and Pfaff 2001:484).”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > Communist Nations, Religion, and TFA
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Froese and Pfaff 2001:484 source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Arguably, religious service attendance is not the sole indicator of one's religiosity as it may not fully capture personal or intrinsic religiosity.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > TABLE 2 ANALYSIS OF RANDOM EFFECTS: THE UNCONDITIONAL MEANS MODEL
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
In the paper
“Nigeria is approximately 50 percent Muslim and 40 percent Christian (CIA 1999).”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > Part II: Individual Nation Analysis
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites CIA 1999
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“While both the heterogeneous and homogeneous variants of the moral communities hypothesis were supported, the heterogeneous version explained more of the variance in TFA.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > DISCUSSION
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The previous studies omit some key controls including marital ties, political bonds, and financial dissatisfaction.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > DISCUSSION
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Data in the World Values Survey were not available on specific Protestant denominations that could have been used to test this third theme in the moral communities hypothesis.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > DISCUSSION
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“To the extent that governments can increase public trust and confidence, there should probably be less tax fraud and more revenue for government to use for its various programs.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > Eastern Religions and TFA
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: unclear — It is unclear whether it could be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The authors state this as an assumption.
The results of the present study could be applied to the prediction of tax fraud behavior.
“Given the association between TFA and reported tax fraud, which has been found not only in the United States, but elsewhere, we assume that the results of the present study could be applied to the prediction of tax fraud behavior.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Frequency of attendance at religious services is a measure of exposure to religious teachings and norms.
“Frequency of attendance at religious services is a measure of exposure to religious teachings and norms.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The second and third measures of religiosity capture self-defined or private or intrinsic religiosity.
“The second and third measures of religiosity capture self-defined or private or intrinsic religiosity.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Persons or respondents residing in the same country are more alike in their characteristics and responses to questions than respondents in another country.
“It may be argued that persons or respondents residing in the same country are more alike in their characteristics and responses to questions (e.g., scores on tax fraud) than respondents in another country.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Nation of residence factors, such as national character, may be potentially confounding variables in cross-national research.
“Research suggests that nation of residence factors, such as national character, may be potentially confounding variables in cross-national research.”
The authors state this as an assumption.
In the mixed model, both γ and ∈ are normally distributed.
“A key assumption in the above model (1.0) is that both γ and ∈ are normally distributed.”
The authors state this as an assumption.
Persons with very high levels of confidence in their government are most apt to see it as legitimate, and least apt to condone cheating on taxes paid to the government.
“We assume that persons with very high levels of confidence in their government are most apt to see it as legitimate, and least apt to condone cheating on taxes paid to the government.”
The authors state this as an assumption.
There will be significant variation in TFA among nations.
“We assume that there will be significant variation in TFA among nations as well.”
The paper relies on this without support.
A nation's mean level of attendance at religious services measures the presence of a moral community.
“First, the presence of a moral community was measured in terms of a nation's mean level of attendance at religious services.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Attendance at religious services is a valid measure of individual religiosity across the studied nations.
“using the frequency of attendance at religious services as the Level 2 variable”
The paper relies on this without support.
TFA (acceptability of tax fraud) is a meaningful proxy for tax fraud behavior.
“the greater the individual religiosity, the lower the approval of tax fraud”
The paper relies on this without support.
In Nigeria, the Muslim majority's domination of government lowers confidence in government for the Christian minority.
“the Muslim majority continues to dominate the government, which apparently lowers confidence in government for the Christian minority.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Japanese culture places a high value on lawfulness.
“Japanese culture has been found to place a high value on lawfulness, with a full 92 percent of the Japanese citing lawfulness as being important.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Young people's religiosity is forced upon them to some extent.
“To some extent, young people's religiosity is forced upon them.”
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?
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Of the 60 studies with quality ratings of 7 or higher, 49 (82%) reported inverse relationships [240–252] and only one study found a positive relationship [253].”
From Religion, Spirituality, and Health: The Research and Clinical Implications (2012) · cites this paper as [247]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Statistics recomputed
Every reported test result, recomputed from its test statistic and degrees of freedom. A result shows as not adding up only once an independent check has confirmed it.
- Consistentz = 4.19reported p < 0 · recomputed p < .001
“(z = 4.19, p < .000”
The paper rounds a very small p to zero
- Consistentz = 154.57reported p < 0 · recomputed p < .001
“(z = 154.57,p < .000”
- Consistentz = 1.88reported p < .05 · recomputed p = .060
“(Z = 1.88, p < .05”
The paper states a one-tailed test
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
“Residual (within-country) 4.883 0.031 154.570.000”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > TABLE 2 ANALYSIS OF RANDOM EFFECTS: THE UNCONDITIONAL MEANS MODEL
Reported 154.57 · recomputed 157.516129
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > TABLE 2 ANALYSIS OF RANDOM EFFECTS: THE UNCONDITIONAL MEANS MODEL
“A key finding in Table 3, Model 2 regards the mean level of TFA.This Level 2 measure of religiosity was unrelated to individual-level TFA.”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > TABLE 2 ANALYSIS OF RANDOM EFFECTS: THE UNCONDITIONAL MEANS MODEL
“Country mean Religiosity score -0.040 -0.38 0.707”
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > Communist Nations, Religion, and TFA
“Communist nations were fully 81 percent less apt than other nations to be marked by the anticipated association”
§ The Effect of Religiosity on Tax Fraud Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis > Part II: Individual Nation Analysis
“communist nations were 91 percent (1 -0.09) less apt than noncommunist nations to have a significant, negative association between religiosity and TFA.”
Citations
Cites
Hierarchical Linear Models: Applications and Data Analysis Methods.
Longford, N. T., Bryk, A. S., & Raudenbush, S. W. (1993) · Contemporary Sociology A Journal of Reviews · doi:10.2307/2075823 · Cited by 18,773
Draper, N. R., & Smith, H. (2005) · Technometrics · doi:10.1198/tech.2005.s303 · Cited by 17,993
Gibbons, D. C., & Hirschi, T. (1970) · The Journal of Criminal Law Criminology and Police Science · doi:10.2307/1142213 · Cited by 5,215
FOUNDATION FOR A GENERAL STRAIN THEORY OF CRIME AND DELINQUENCY*
AGNEW, R. (1992) · Criminology · doi:10.1111/j.1745-9125.1992.tb01093.x · Cited by 5,046
Modernization, Cultural Change, and the Persistence of Traditional Values
Inglehart, R., & Baker, W. E. (2000) · American Sociological Review · doi:10.2307/2657288 · Cited by 4,524
Hirschi, T. (2017) · Routledge eBooks · doi:10.4324/9781315081649 · Cited by 4,510
Culture Shift in Advanced Industrial Society
Inglehart, R. (1990) · doi:10.1515/9780691186740 · Cited by 4,477
Culture shift in advanced industrial society
(1990) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.28-1180 · Cited by 3,800
Hierarchical Linear Models: Applications and Data Analysis Methods.
Goldstein, H., Bryk, A. S., & Raudenbush, S. W. (1993) · Journal of the American Statistical Association · doi:10.2307/2290750 · Cited by 3,320
Handbook of Religion and Health
Koenig, H. G., McCullough, M. E., & Larson, D. B. (2004) · American Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry · doi:10.1097/00019442-200405000-00015 · Cited by 3,262
Research works printed but not linked: 11
- Central Intelligence Agency, 1999, World fact book
- Coward H., 1988, Reader in eastern religions
- Dean P., 1980, Taxpayer attitudes to income tax evasion: An empirical study, British Tax Review, 28, 28
- Durkheim E., 1961, Moral education
- Hessing D., 1992, Why people pay taxes
- Kaariainen K., 1989, Discussion of scientific atheism as a soviet science
- Parrinder G., 1971, World religions: From ancient times to the present
- SAS Institute, 2004, SAS/STAT, the mixed procedure [computer software], version 9.1
- Sheffrin S., 1992, Why people pay taxes
- Smith H., 1991, The world's religions
- Toropov B., 2002, World religions
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Religion, Spirituality, and Health: The Research and Clinical Implications
Koenig, H. G. (2012) · ISRN Psychiatry · doi:10.5402/2012/278730 · Cited by 2,423
“[251] S.”
BackgroundDoes Confucianism Reduce Minority Shareholder Expropriation? Evidence from China
Du, X. (2014) · Journal of Business Ethics · doi:10.1007/s10551-014-2325-2 · Cited by 387
Religion and Suicide Acceptability: A Cross-National Analysis
Stack, S. J., & Kposowa, A. J. (2011) · Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion · doi:10.1111/j.1468-5906.2011.01568.x · Cited by 237
Self-citationReligion, the Nature of Ultimate Owner, and Corporate Philanthropic Giving: Evidence from China
Du, X., Jian, W., Du, Y., Feng, W., & Zeng, Q. (2013) · Journal of Business Ethics · doi:10.1007/s10551-013-1804-1 · Cited by 224
“…regression, as shown in Columns (1) and (4) of Table 4: (1) The coefficients on LNTAX are negative and significant at 1 % level, suggesting that corporate location and thus religiosity is significantly negatively associated with higher total provincial tax, consistent with Stack and Kposowa (2006).”
BackgroundResultInfluentialManagers' gender role attitudes: a country institutional profile approach
Parboteeah, K. P., Hoegl, M., & Cullen, J. B. (2008) · Journal of International Business Studies · doi:10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8400384 · Cited by 201
Metadata
- Authors
- STACK, S., & KPOSOWA, A.
- Affiliations
- University of Michigan (US)
- University of California, Riverside (US)
- Venue
- Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2006-08-11
- Volume
- 45
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 325-351
- ISSN
- 0021-8294 (ISSN-L)
- 1468-5906
- OpenAlex
- W2082047379
- Semantic Scholar
- e8416f3164dc6163eb81636206d41158e4ec371e
- Cited by
- 148
- References
- 84
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 17 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 16 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 10 · 2013: 8 · 2012: 8
- FWCI
- 3.21
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- hdl.handle.net
- Locations
- Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion (publishedVersion)
- Deep Blue (University of Michigan) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Taxation and Compliance Studies
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Religion and Society Interactions
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Corruption and Economic Development
- Keywords
- religiosity, social bonds, deviance, religious repression, communist regime, cross-national comparison, financial stress, tax compliance
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.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-11, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-11 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
Cited sources are checked with a language model’s help (gpt-6-sol).
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
