Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online 2024-10
How anti-corruption actions win hearts: The evaluation of anti-corruption performance,social inequality and political trust—Evidence from the Asian Barometer Survey and the Latino Barometer Survey
Corruption is seen as a political cancer that erodes the public’s trust in political system. While it is generally agreed that corruption and political trust are negatively correlated, few researchers have explored the impact of anti-corruption performance on political trust. In this article, we focus on whether combating corruption can enhance political trust and how this influencing mechanism is realized. Based on analyses of the Asian Barometer Survey and the Latino Barometer Survey, we found that political trust is affected by the evaluation of anti-corruption performance and social inequality. The evaluation of anti-corruption performance can enhance political trust directly, while social inequality undermines political trust directly. Social inequality can also moderate the positive effect of the evaluation of anti-corruption performance on political trust. This study not only fills the previous research gap in the relationship between anti-corruption and political trust but also has great practical significance.
AlvesWMRossiPH (1978) Who should get what? Fairness judgments of the distribution of earnings. American Journal of Sociology84(3): 541–564.
2.
AndersenR (2012) Support for democracy in cross-national perspective: The detrimental effect of economic inequality. Research in Social Stratification and Mobility30(4): 389–402.
3.
AndersonCJSingerMM (2008) The sensitive left and the impervious right: Multilevel models and the politics of inequality, ideology, and legitimacy in Europe. Comparative Political Studies41(4–5): 564–599.
4.
AndersonCJTverdovaYV (2003) Corruption, political allegiances, and attitudes toward government in contemporary democracies. American Journal of Political Science47(1): 91–109.
5.
AnderssonSHeywoodPM (2009) The politics of perception: Use and abuse of transparency international’s approach to measuring corruption. Political Studies57(4): 746–767.
6.
ArielyGUslanerEM (2016) Corruption, fairness, and inequality. International Political Science Review38(3): 349–362.
7.
AtkinsonAB (2015) Inequality, What Can Be Done. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
8.
BargstedMOrtizCCáceresI, et al. (2022) Social and political trust in a low trust society. Political Behavior. Epub ahead of print 18 January. DOI: 10.1007/s11109-021-09762-2.
9.
BowlerSKarpJA (2004) Politicians, scandals, and trust in government. Political Behavior26(3): 271–287.
10.
CatterbergGMorenoA (2006) The individual bases of political trust: Trends in new and established democracies. International Journal of Public Opinion Research18(1): 31–48.
11.
ChangECChuY (2006) Corruption and trust: Exceptionalism in Asian democracies?The Journal of Politics68(2): 259–271.
12.
CharronN (2016) Do corruption measures have a perception problem? Assessing the relationship between experiences and perceptions of corruption among citizens and experts. European Political Science Review8(1): 147–171.
13.
ChengX (2020) Malaise effect or virtuous effect? The dynamics of Internet use and political trust in China. International Journal of Communication14: 1995–2016.
14.
CitrinJ (1974) Comment: The political relevance of trust in government. The American Political Science Review68(3): 973–988.
15.
CohenJ (1988) Statistic Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences. New York: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
16.
CookTEGronkeP (2005) The skeptical American: Revisiting the meanings of trust in government and confidence in institutions. The Journal of Politics67(3): 784–803.
17.
ErkelPVMeerT (2016) Macroeconomic performance, political trust and the Great Recession: A multilevel analysis of the effects of within-country fluctuations in macroeconomic performance on political trust in 15 EU countries, 1999-2011. European Journal of Political Research55(1): 177–197.
18.
FuXW (2018) The contextual effects of political trust on happiness: Evidence from China. Social Indicators Research139: 491–516.
19.
GoubinS (2020) Economic inequality, perceived responsiveness and political trust. Acta Politica55(2): 267–304.
20.
GoubinSHoogheM (2020) The effect of inequality on the relation between socioeconomic stratification and political trust in Europe. Social Justice Research33: 219–247.
21.
Gyimah-BrempongK (2002) Corruption, economic growth, and income inequality in Africa. Economics of Governance3(3): 183–209.
22.
HabibovNAfandiECheungA (2017) Sand or grease? Corruption-institutional trust nexus in post-Soviet countries. Journal of Eurasian Studies8(2): 172–184.
23.
HainmuellerJMummoloJXuY (2019) How much should we trust estimates from multiplicative interaction models? Simple tools to improve empirical practice. Political Analysis27(2): 163–192.
24.
HakhverdianAMayneQ (2012) Institutional trust, education, and corruption: A micro-macro interactive approach. The Journal of Politics74(3): 739–750.
25.
HellmanJSJonesGKaufmannD, et al. (2000) Measuring governance, corruption and state capture: How firms and bureaucrats shape the business environment in transition economics. Word Bank Policy Research, Working paper no. 2312. Washington, DC: Word Bank Policy Research.
26.
HetheringtonMJ (1998) The political relevance of political trust. American Political Science Review92(4): 791–808.
27.
InglehartR (1990) Culture Shift in Advanced Industrial Society. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
28.
JohnstonM (1998) Fighting systematic corruption: Social foundations for institutional reform. European Journal of Development Research10(1): 85–104.
29.
KangSZhuJ (2020) Do people trust the government more? Unpacking the distinct impacts of anticorruption policies on political trust. Political Research Quarterly74(2): 1–16.
30.
KimMVoorheesM (2011) Government effectiveness and institutional trust in Japan, South Korea, and China. Asian Politics & Policy3(3): 413–432.
31.
KingGZengL (2006) The dangers of extreme counterfactuals. Political Analysis14(2): 131–159.
32.
KrieckhausJSonBBellingerNM, et al. (2014) Economic inequality and democratic support. The Journal of Politics76(1): 139–151.
33.
KroknesVFJakobsenTGGrønningLM (2015) Economic performance and political trust: The impact of the financial crisis on European citizens. European Societies17(5): 700–723.
34.
LeeAR (1994) Economics vs. values in political trust in Korea. Studies in Comparative International Development29(4): 25–40.
35.
LeeARGlasureYU (2002) Political cynicism in South Korea: Economics or values?Asian Affairs: An American Review29(1): 43–58.
36.
LeeDChangCYHurH (2020) Economic performance, income inequality and political trust: New evidence from a cross-national study of 14 Asian countries. Asia Pacific Journal of Public Administration42(2): 66–88.
37.
LeffNH (1964) Economic development through bureaucratic corruption. American Behavioral Scientist8(3): 8–14.
38.
LiL (2022) Decoding political trust in China: A machine learning analysis. The China Quarterly249: 1–20.
39.
LindeJErlingssonGÓ (2013) The eroding effect of corruption on system support in Sweden. Governance26(4): 585–603.
40.
LipsetSMSchneiderW (1983) The decline of confidence in American institutions. Political Science Quarterly98(3): 379–402.
41.
LovelessMWhitefieldS (2011) Being unequal and seeing inequality: Explaining the political significance of social inequality in new market democracies. European Journal of Political Research50(2): 239–266.
42.
ManionM (2004) Corruption by Design: Building Clean Government in Mainland China and Hong Kong. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
43.
MauroP (1995) Corruption and growth. The Quarterly Journal of Economics110(3): 681–712.
44.
MeonPGSekkatK (2005) Does corruption grease or sand the wheels of growth?Public Choice122(1): 69–97.
45.
MillerAH (1974) Political issues and trust in government: 1964-1970. American Political Science Review68(3): 951–972.
46.
MishlerWRoseR (1997) Trust, distrust and skepticism: Popular evaluations of civil and political institutions in post-communist societies. The Journal of Politics59(2): 418–451.
47.
MishlerWRoseR (2001) What are the origins of political trust? Testing institutional and cultural theories in post-communist societies. Comparative Political Studies34(1): 30–62.
48.
MorrisSDKlesnerJL (2010) Corruption and trust: Theoretical considerations and evidence from Mexico. Comparative Political Studies43(10): 1258–1285.
49.
NewtonK (2001) Trust, social capital, civil society, and democracy. International Political Science Review22(2): 201–214.
50.
NisbettREWilsonTD (1977) The halo effect: Evidence for unconscious alteration of judgments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology35(4): 250–256.
51.
NorrisP (1999) Critical Citizens: Global Support for Democratic Government. New York: Oxford University Press.
52.
NorrisP (2000) A Virtuous Circle: Political Communications in Postindustrial Societies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
53.
NyeJSJrZelikowPDKingDC (1997) Why People Don’t Trust Government. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
54.
OlkenBA (2009) Corruption perception vs. corruption reality. Journal of Public Economics93(7–8): 950–964.
55.
OskarssonS (2010) Generalized trust and political support: A cross-national investigation. Acta Politica45: 423–443.
56.
PerssonARothsteinBTeorellJ (2013) Why anticorruption reforms fail—Systemic corruption as a collective action problem. Governance26(3): 449–471.
57.
PharrSJ (2000) Official’s misconduct and public distrust: Japan and the Trilateral Democracies. In: PharrSJPutnamRD (eds) Disaffected Democracies: What’s Troubling the Trilateral Countries. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, pp. 173–201.
58.
PutnamRD (1995) Bowling alone: America’s declining social capital. In: CrothersLLockhartC (eds) Culture and Politics. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 223–234.
59.
RainerHSiedlerT (2009) Does democracy foster trust?Journal of Comparative Economics37(2): 251–269.
60.
RicheyS (2010) The impact of corruption on social trust. American Politics Research38(4): 676–690.
61.
RobinsonRVBellW (1978) Equality, success, and social justice in England and the United States. American Sociological Review43(2): 125–143.
62.
RoseRMcAllisterI (1996) Is money the measure of welfare in Russia?Review of Income and Wealth42(1): 75–90.
63.
RothsteinB (2009) Creating political legitimacy: Electoral democracy versus quality of government. American Behavioral Scientist53(3): 311–330.
64.
RothsteinBStolleD (2008) The state and social capital: An institutional theory of generalized trust. Comparative Politics40(4): 441–459.
65.
ScheidelW (2017) The Great Leveler: Violence and the History of Inequality from the Stone Age to the Twenty-First Century. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
66.
SchoonIChengH (2011) Determinants of political trust: A lifetime learning model. Developmental Psychology47(3): 619–631.
67.
SchumacherI (2013) Political stability, corruption, and trust in politicians. Economic Modelling31: 359–369.
68.
ShahDVChoJEvelandWPJr, et al. (2005) Information and expression in a digital age: Modeling internet effects on civic participation. Communication Research32(5): 531–565.
69.
ShiT (2001) Cultural values and political trust: A comparison of the People’s Republic of China and Taiwan. Comparative Politics33(4): 401–419.
70.
SmithHJTylerTR (1996) Justice and power: When will justice concerns encourage the advantaged to support policies which redistribute economic resources and the disadvantaged to willingly obey the law. European Journal of Social Psychology26(2): 171–200.
71.
StiglitzJE (2012) The Price of Inequality: How Today’s Divided Society Endangers Our Future. New York: W. W. Norton & Company.
72.
TanziV (1998) Corruption around the world: Causes, consequences, scope, and cures. IMF Staff Papers45(4): 559–594.
73.
TolbertCJMcNealRS (2003) Unraveling the effects of the Internet on political participation?Political Research Quarterly56(2): 175–185.
74.
TsaiLLTrinhMLiuS (2022) What makes anticorruption punishment popular? Individual-level evidence from China. The Journal of Politics84(1): 602–606.
75.
TuckerA (2004) The role of reflexive trust in modernizing public administrations. Public Performance & Management Review28(1): 53–74.
76.
UslanerEM (2002) The Moral Foundations of Trust. New York: Cambridge University Press.
77.
UslanerEM (2007) Inequality and corruption. In: MavrotasGShorrocksA (eds) Advancing Development: Studies in Development Economics and Policy. London: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 100–122.
78.
UslanerEM (2008) Corruption, Inequality, and the Rule of Law. New York: Cambridge University Press.
79.
UslanerEM (2013) Corruption, the inequality trap and trust in government. In: ZmerliSHoogheM (eds) Political Trust: Why Context Matters. Colchester: ECPR Press, pp. 141–162.
80.
UslanerEM (ed.) (2018) The Oxford Handbook of Social and Political Trust. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
81.
ValenzuelaSParkNKeeKF (2009) Is there social capital in a social network site? Facebook use and college students’ life satisfaction, trust, and participation. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication14(4): 875–901.
82.
WangYDicksonBJ (2021) How corruption investigations undermine regime support: Evidence from China. Political Science Research and Methods10(1): 33–48.
83.
WegenerB (2000) Political culture and post-communist transition—A social justice approach: Introduction. Social Justice Research13(2): 75–82.
84.
WroeA (2015) Economic insecurity and political trust in the United States. American Politics Research44(1): 131–163.
85.
YouJSKhagramS (2005) A comparative study of inequality and corruption. American Sociological Review70(1): 136–157.
86.
ZhouYJJinS (2018) Inequality and political trust in China: The social volcano thesis re-examined. The China Quarterly236: 1–30.
87.
ZhuBShiW (2019) Greasing the wheels of commerce? Corruption and foreign investment. The Journal of Politics81(4): 1311–1327.
88.
ZhuJLuJShiT (2013) When Grapevine News meets mass media: Different information sources and popular perceptions of government corruption in Mainland China. Comparative Political Studies46(8): 920–946.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
