The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Political Democracy and the Size Distribution of Income
Abstract
This paper reviews the major theoretical arguments that link political democracy with economic inequality. It then shows that previous empirical analyses of the linkage have produced inconclusive results because they have suffered from specification, measurement, and sample-composition problems. A nonrecursive model is proposed that overcomes many of these limitations. Using 2SLS and a new weighted 2SLS procedure, we find no evidence of direct effects of political democracy on income inequality, or vice versa. However, economic development influences both variables, while world-system position, Protestantism, and British colonial experience affects political democracy. Population age-structure and systematic measurement error induce changes in income inequality. The paper concludes with a discussion both of the flaws in prior arguments linking democracy with inequality, and of the political processes that undermine any such linkage. In democracies the poor have more sovereign power than the men of property; for they are more numerous and the decisions of the majority prevail. Aristotle, The Politics, 1962:237 Where one set of people possesses a great deal and the other nothing, the result is either extreme democracy [mob rule] or unmixed oligarchy or a tyranny due to the excesses of the other two. Aristotle, The Politics, 1962:173 Debate over the linkage between political democracy and social equality has a venerable history. At least since Aristotle, many have held that by reducing inequalities in the distribution of political power, democracy helps to reduce inequalities of wealth and status. Paralleling this view, it also has been argued that extreme inequalities in wealth undermine democratic political structures. At the same time, it has been suggested that democracy and inequality have no meaningful bearing on each other. This paper offers a fresh approach to the democracy-inequality linkage. We begin with a survey of the pertinent substantive arguments and the assumptions on which they are based. This is followed by a review of representative empirical studies which shows that those studies have generated inconclusive results. Further, there is no readily apparent way to resolve these differences, because, as we indicate below, the empirical studies have employed a variety of samples, measurement procedures, and model specifications. Finally, we report our own empirical analysis, which seeks to correct some of the major specification and measurement problems of previous work. This analysis is based on a more comprehensive data set than has been available in the past, and centers on 60 Western and Third World countries.
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
Hewitt, C. (1977) · American Sociological Review · doi:10.2307/2094750 · Cited by 216
Cited by
Economic Origins of Dictatorship and Democracy
Acemoglu, D., & Robinson, J. A. (2005) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511510809 · Cited by 4,810
(2005) · Cited by 3,670
Democracy with Adjectives: Conceptual Innovation in Comparative Research
Collier, D., & Levitsky, S. (1997) · World Politics · doi:10.1353/wp.1997.0009 · Cited by 2,132
State Repression and the Domestic Democratic Peace
Davenport, C. (2007) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511510021 · Cited by 549
Democratization and Research Methods
Coppedge, M. (2012) · doi:10.1017/cbo9781139016179 · Cited by 303
Metadata
- Authors
- Bollen, K. A., & Jackman, R. W.
- Venue
- American Sociological Review
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 1985-08
- Volume
- 50
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 438
- ISSN
- 0003-1224 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2074896436
- Cited by
- 535
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 41.84
- 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: Political Democracy and the Size Distribution of Income. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2307/2095432
- The paper
- Bollen, K. A., & Jackman, R. W. (1985). Political Democracy and the Size Distribution of Income. American Sociological Review. https://doi.org/10.2307/2095432
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.