CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 2,025Political Conflict and GovernancePolitical Theory and DemocracyElectoral Systems and Political Participation

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 68 of the 68 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

What Do We Know About Democratization After Twenty Years?

Geddes, Barbara·1999·Annual Review of Political Science
DOI 10.1146/annurev.polisci.2.1.115
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

This essay synthesizes the results of the large number of studies of late–20th-century democratization published during the last 20 years. Strong evidence supports the claims that democracy is more likely in more developed countries and that regime transitions of all kinds are more likely during economic downturns. Very few of the other arguments advanced in the transitions literature, however, appear to be generally true. This study proposes a theoretical model, rooted in characteristics of different types of authoritarian regimes, to explain many of the differences in democratization experience across cases in different regions. Evidence drawn from a data set that includes 163 authoritarian regimes offers preliminary support for the model proposed.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1146/annurev.polisci.2.1.115

Cites

68 of 68 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Verification

Claims the paper makes

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

Claims other papers make about this one

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

Citations

Cites

Research works printed but not linked: 9

  1. Agüero F. 1992. The military and the limits to democratization in South America. In Issues in Democratic Consolidation: The New South American Democracies in Comparative Perspective , ed. S Mainwaring, G O'Donnell, JS Valenzuela, pp. 153–98. Notre Dame, IN: Univ. Notre Dame Press
  2. Barros ASC. 1978. The Brazilian military: professional socialization, political performance and state building . PhD thesis. Univ. Chicago. 439 pp.
  3. de Oliveira ER, 1978, As Forças Armadas: Política e Ideologia no Brasil (1964–1969).
  4. Karl TL. 1986. Petroleum and political pacts: the transition to democracy in Venezuela. SeeO'Donnell et al 1986, 3:196–219
  5. Linz JJ, 1998, Sultanistic Regimes.
  6. Maxwell K. 1986. Regime overthrow and the prospects for democratic transition in Portugal. SeeO'Donnell et al 1986, 2:109–37
  7. Nordlinger E, 1977, Soldiers in Politics: Military Coups and Governments.
  8. O'Donnell G, 1986, Transitions from Authoritarian Rule. 4 vols.
  9. Snyder R. 1998. Paths out of sultanistic regimes: combining structural and voluntarist perspectives. SeeLinz & Chehabi 1998, pp. 49–81

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 2,025

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Geddes, B.
Affiliations
University of California, Los Angeles (US)
Corresponding author
Geddes, Barbara
ORCID
Geddes, Barbara
Venue
Annual Review of Political Science
Publisher
Annual Reviews
Published
1999-06
Volume
2
Issue
1
Pages
115-144
ISSN
  • 1094-2939 (ISSN-L)
  • 1545-1577
DOI
10.1146/annurev.polisci.2.1.115
OpenAlex
W2166749687
Cited by
2,025
References
68
Citations by year
2026: 85 · 2025: 119 · 2024: 127 · 2023: 114 · 2022: 133 · 2021: 74 · 2020: 173 · 2019: 128 · 2018: 132 · 2017: 100 · 2016: 95 · 2015: 101 · 2014: 84 · 2013: 101 · 2012: 84
FWCI
21.59
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Annual Review of Political Science (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Political Conflict and Governance
  • Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Political Theory and Democracy
  • Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Electoral Systems and Political Participation
Keywords
democratization, tipping points, authoritarian regimes, political regimes, economic downturn, economic development and democracy, late 20th century

About these checks

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

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

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

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

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