The DOI matches its Crossref record; 57 of the 57 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Why Do Corrupt Governments Maintain Public Support?
Abstract
This article addresses an issue often neglected by the current literature on political corruption: Why do citizens support corrupt governments? The authors argue that people in countries where government institutions are weak and patron-client relationships strong are more likely to support a corrupt leader from whom they expect to receive tangible benefits. Using a cross-national analysis of citizens in 14 countries, the authors find statistical evidence consistent with the hypothesis, which also complements some of the recent works on clientelism and institutional development. This has important implications for scholars and practitioners working on accountability and good governance issues because its shows that as long as corrupt leaders can satisfy their clientelistic networks by manipulating government resources, they are likely to retain political support. This, in turn, questions the assumption that a few administrative reforms can weed out corruption in countries where formal and informal institutions provide opportunities for this phenomenon to thrive.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Mauro, P. (1995) · The Quarterly Journal of Economics · doi:10.2307/2946696 · Cited by 8,820
Political Order in Changing Societies
Huntington, S. P. (1970) · Verfassung in Recht und Übersee · doi:10.5771/0506-7286-1970-2-257 · Cited by 6,333
Political Order in Changing Societies.
Zolberg, A. R., & Huntington, S. P. (1969) · Midwest Journal of Political Science · doi:10.2307/2110237 · Cited by 5,753
Africa's Growth Tragedy: Policies and Ethnic Divisions
Easterly, W., & Levine, R. (1997) · The Quarterly Journal of Economics · doi:10.1162/003355300555466 · Cited by 5,649
INSTITUTIONS AND ECONOMIC PERFORMANCE: CROSS‐COUNTRY TESTS USING ALTERNATIVE INSTITUTIONAL MEASURES
Knack, S., & Keefer, P. (1995) · Economics & Politics · doi:10.1111/j.1468-0343.1995.tb00111.x · Cited by 5,084
Making the most of statistical analyses: improving interpretation and presentation
King, G., Tomz, M., & Wittenberg, J. (2000) · American Journal of Political Science · doi:10.2307/2669316 · Cited by 3,232
Incentives to cultivate a personal vote: A rank ordering of electoral formulas
Carey, J. M., & Shugart, M. S. (1995) · Electoral Studies · doi:10.1016/0261-3794(94)00035-2 · Cited by 2,663
Economic Development Through Bureaucratic Corruption
Leff, N. H. (1964) · American Behavioral Scientist · doi:10.1177/000276426400800303 · Cited by 2,568
Corruption and Government: Causes, Consequences, and Reform
Rose-Ackerman, S. (1999) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9781139175098 · Cited by 2,172
Computing Interaction Effects and Standard Errors in Logit and Probit Models
Norton, E. C., Wang, H., & Ai, C. (2004) · The Stata Journal: Promoting communications on statistics and Stata · doi:10.1177/1536867x0400400206 · Cited by 1,761
Cited by
Turning a Blind Eye: Experimental Evidence of Partisan Bias in Attitudes Toward Corruption
Anduiza, E., Gallego, A., & Muñoz, J. (2013) · Comparative Political Studies · doi:10.1177/0010414013489081 · Cited by 331
Metadata
- Authors
- Manzetti, L., & Wilson, C. J.
- Venue
- Comparative Political Studies
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2007-08
- Volume
- 40
- Issue
- 8
- Pages
- 949-970
- ISSN
- 0010-4140 (ISSN-L)
- 1552-3829
- OpenAlex
- W2026999751
- Cited by
- 306
- References
- 57
- FWCI
- 21.45
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Why Do Corrupt Governments Maintain Public Support? https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/0010414005285759
- The paper
- Manzetti, L., & Wilson, C. J. (2007). Why Do Corrupt Governments Maintain Public Support? Comparative Political Studies. https://doi.org/10.1177/0010414005285759
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.