This study presents a contextual explanation of regime support by arguing that although an individual’s instrumental economic calculation and intrinsic democratic value are important predictors of political support, the extent to which they matter is contingent on the nature of the regime, as defined primarily by democracy. Using data drawn from the second wave of the Asia Barometer, we find that economic perceptions are less important for regime support in democratic countries than they are in authoritarian countries, and an affection for democracy makes people more critical of the political system in authoritarian countries than in democratic countries.
AlcañizIHellwigT (2011) Who’s to Blame? The Distribution of Responsibility in Developing Democracies. British Journal of Political Science41 (2): 389–411.
2.
AlemánJWoodsD (forthcoming) Value Orientations From the World Values Survey: How Comparable Are They Cross-Nationally?Comparative Political Studies.
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.
BelgeCKarakoçE (2015) Minorities in the Middle East: Ethnicity, Religion, and Support for Authoritarianism. Political Research Quarterly68 (2): 280–292.
5.
BellinE (2000) Contingent Democrats: Industrialists, Labor, and Democratization in Late-Developing Countries. World Politics52 (2): 175–205.
6.
BoothJASeligsonMA (2009) The Legitimacy Puzzle in Latin America: Political Support and Democracy in Eight Nations. Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press.
7.
BorooahVKKatosABKatsouliE (2013) Inter-Country Differences in Voter Satisfaction with the Democratic Process: A Study of World Elections. Public Choice157 (3–4): 569–584.
8.
BrancatiD (2014) Pocketbook Protests: Explaining the Emergence of Pro-Democracy Protests Worldwide. Comparative Political Studies47 (11): 1503–1530.
9.
BrattonMMattesR (2001) Support for Democracy in Africa: Intrinsic or Instrumental?British Journal of Political Science31 (3): 447–474.
10.
BrattonMMattesRGyimah-BoadiE (2005) Public Opinion, Democracy, and Market Reform in Africa. Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press.
11.
CarlinREMoseleyM (2015) Good Democrats, Bad Targets: Democratic Values and Clientelistic Vote Buying. Journal of Politics77 (1): 14–26.
12.
ChenJ (2004) Popular Political Support in Urban China. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
13.
ChuY-HBrattonMLagosM. (2008) Public Opinion and Democratic Legitimacy. Journal of Democracy19 (2): 74–87.
14.
Conroy-KrutzJKerrN (2015) Dynamics of Democratic Satisfaction in Transitional Settings: Evidence from a Panel Study in Uganda. Political Research Quarterly68 (3): 593–606.
15.
DaltonRJ (1999) Political Support in Advanced Industrial Democracies. In: NorrisP (ed.) Critical Citizens: Global Support for Democratic Government. Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press, pp.57–77.
16.
DaltonRJ (2004) Democratic Challenges, Democratic Choices: The Erosion of Political Support in Advanced Industrial Democracies. Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press.
17.
DaltonRJAndersonCJ (2011) Citizens, Context, and Choice: How Context Shapes Citizens’ Electoral Choices. Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press.
18.
DaltonRJShinDC (eds) (2006) Citizens, Democracy, and Markets around the Pacific Rim: Congruence Theory and Political Culture. Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press.
19.
DiamondL (2011) Why Democracies Survive. Journal of Democracy22 (1): 17–30.
20.
DicksonESGordonSCHuberGA (2015) Institutional Sources of Legitimate Authority: An Experimental Investigation. American Journal of Political Science59 (1): 109–127.
21.
DuchRMStevensonRT (2008) The Economic Vote: How Political and Economic Institutions Condition Election Results. Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press.
22.
EastonD (1965) A Systems Analysis of Political Life. New York: John Wiley and Sons.
23.
EastonD (1975) A Re-Assessment of the Concept of Political Support. British Journal of Political Science5 (4): 435–457.
24.
FishMS (1998) Mongolia: Democracy without Prerequisites. Journal of Democracy9 (3): 127–141.
25.
FukuyamaF (1997) The Illusion of Exceptionalism. Journal of Democracy8 (3): 146–149.
26.
FungA (2011) Reinventing Democracy in Latin America. Perspectives on Politics9 (4): 857–871.
27.
HaggardSKaufmanRR (forthcoming) Democratization during the Third Wave. Annual Review of Political Science.
28.
HellwigT (2012) Constructing Accountability: Party Position Taking and Economic Voting. Comparative Political Studies45 (1): 91–118.
29.
HellwigTSamuelsD (2008) Electoral Accountability and the Variety of Democratic Regimes. British Journal of Political Science38 (1): 65–90.
30.
HetheringtonMJ (1998) The Political Relevance of Political Trust. American Political Science Review92 (4): 791–808.
31.
LevitskySWayLA (2010) Competitive Authoritarianism: Hybrid Regimes after the Cold War. Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press.
32.
Lewis-BeckMSStegmaierM (2013) The VP-Function Revisited: A Survey of the Literature on Vote and Popularity Functions after over 40 Years. Public Choice157 (3–4): 367–385.
33.
Lewis-BeckMSTangWMartiniNF (2014) A Chinese Popularity Function: Sources of Government Support. Political Research Quarterly67 (1): 16–25.
34.
LüX (2014) Social Policy and Regime Legitimacy: The Effects of Education Reform in China. American Political Science Review108 (2): 423–437.
35.
MishlerWRoseR (2001) What Are the Origins of Political Trust? Testing Institutional and Cultural Theories in Post-communist Societies. Comparative Political Studies34 (1): 30–62.
36.
NorrisP (1999a) Introduction: The Growth of Critical Citizens? In: NorrisP (ed.) Critical Citizens: Global Support for Democratic Government. Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press.
37.
NorrisP (ed.) (1999b) Critical Citizens: Global Support for Democratic Government. Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press.
38.
PemsteinDMeserveSAMeltonJ (2010) Democratic Compromise: A Latent Variable Analysis of Ten Measures of Regime Type. Political Analysis18 (4): 426–449.
39.
PrzeworskiAAlvarezMCheibubJA. (1996) What Makes Democracies Endure?Journal of Democracy7 (1): 39–55.
40.
PrzeworskiAAlvarezMJoseCheibub. (2000) Democracy and Development: Political Institutions and Well-Being in the World, 1950–1990. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press.
41.
RoseRMishlerW (2002) Comparing Regime Support in Non-democratic and Democratic Countries. Democratization9 (2): 1–20.
42.
RoseRMishlerWMunroN (2011) Popular Support for an Undemocratic Regime: The Changing Views of Russians. Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press.
43.
StegmuellerD (2013) How Many Countries for Multilevel Modeling? A Comparison of Frequentist and Bayesian Approaches. American Journal of Political Science57 (3): 748–761.
44.
SvolikMW (2013) Learning to Love Democracy: Electoral Accountability, Government Performance, and the Consolidation of Democracy. American Journal of Political Science57 (3): 685–702.
45.
SvolikMW (2015) Which Democracies Will Last? Coups, Incumbent Takeovers, and the Dynamic of Democratic Consolidation. British Journal of Political Science45 (4): 715–738.
46.
TangMHuheNZhouQ (forthcoming) Contingent Democratization: When Do Economic Crises Matter?British Journal of Political Science.
47.
ThompsonMR (2001) Whatever Happened to ‘Asian Values’?Journal of Democracy12 (4): 154–165.
WangZDaltonRJShinDC (2006) Political Trust, Political Performance, and Support for Democracy. In: DaltonRJShinDC (eds) Citizens, Democracy, and Markets around the Pacific Rim: Congruence Theory and Political Culture. Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press, pp.135–153.
50.
WellsJMKrieckhausJ (2006) Does National Context Influence Democratic Satisfaction? A Multi-Level Analysis. Political Research Quarterly59 (4): 569–578.
51.
WrightJ (2008) Political Competition and Democratic Stability in New Democracies. British Journal of Political Science38 (2): 221–245.
52.
YapOF (2011) A Strategic Model of Economic Performance and Democratization in South Korea and Taiwan. British Journal of Political Science42 (1): 213–239.
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.
