Multi-level modelling of time-series cross-sectional data reveals the dynamic interaction between ecological threats and democratic development

Abstract

What is the relationship between environment and democracy? The framework of cultural evolution suggests that societal development is an adaptation to ecological threats. Pertinent theories assume that democracy emerges as societies adapt to ecological factors such as higher economic wealth, lower pathogen threats, less demanding climates and fewer natural disasters. However, previous research confused within-country processes with between-country processes and erroneously interpreted between-country findings as if they generalize to within-country mechanisms. We analyse a time-series cross-sectional dataset to study the dynamic relationship between environment and democracy (1949–2016), accounting for previous misconceptions in levels of analysis. By separating within-country processes from between-country processes, we find that the relationship between environment and democracy not only differs by country but also depends on the level of analysis. Economic wealth predicts increasing levels of democracy in between-country comparisons, but within-country comparisons show that democracy declines in years when countries become wealthier. This relationship is only prevalent among historically wealthy countries but not among historically poor countries, whose wealth also increased over time. By contrast, pathogen prevalence predicts lower levels of democracy in both between-country and within-country comparisons. Multi-level modelling also confirms that the within-country effect of pathogen prevalence remains robust even after considering a region-level analysis. Longitudinal analyses identifying temporal precedence reveal that not only reductions in pathogen prevalence drive future democracy, but also democracy reduces future pathogen prevalence and increases future wealth. These nuanced results contrast with previous analyses using narrow, cross-sectional data. Overall, our findings illuminate the dynamic process by which environment and democracy shape each other.

Infection threat shapes our social instincts

“…Throughout the twentieth century, in part thanks to the diffusion of vaccination and the introduction of antibiotics, public health did finally improve (Ward and Warren 2006 ): from 1950 to 2017, the global average life expectancy rose from 53 to 76 years for women and from 48 to 71 for men (GBD 2017 Mortality Collaborators 2018). At the same time, in line with the viewpoint presented here and despite the impression one gets from television, the odds of being discriminated, abused, tortured, or deliberately killed have sunk lower, and democracy and civil rights risen higher, than ever before (Pinker 2011 , 2018 ; Kusano and Kemmelmeier 2020 ). Yet our current prospects may not be nearly as good as one might feel entitled to expect.…”

“…At first sight, these findings are consistent with the idea that political conservatism and an authoritarian attitude might be behavioral immune responses to infection threats. Indeed, decreases in parasite prevalence predict later increases in democracy (Kusano and Kemmelmeier 2020 ). However, two independent studies suggest that activation of the behavioral immune system can push people’s views not only toward the right, as shown by many, but occasionally toward the left too (Feinberg and Willer 2013 ; Kam and Estes 2016 ; see also Elad-Strenger et al 2020 ).…”

Affective Interpersonal Touch in Close Relationships: A Cross-Cultural Perspective

“…There are two nonexclusive explanations for this inconsistency: first, the parasite stress factor we included in our research was relatively narrow and it did not cover the whole range of existing pathogens and contagious diseases. This hypothesis might be tested in further research by exploring the dependencies between our touch indices and other pathogen stress variables such as longitudinal pathogen prevalence (Kusano & Kemmelmeier, 2020). Second, our pathogen index was based on averaged responses of individual participants of our research.…”

“…To more accurately assess whether preferred distance to an individual relates to affective touch toward that same individual, future touch studies should adjust these measures such that the interaction partners are congruent. Fourth, to further discern the interplay of biological and personality factors in individual and cultural affective touch variation, future research should look at a broader range of measures related to both touch and the behavioral immune system, such as personality, disgust sensitivity, perceived vulnerability to disease, or longitudinal pathogen prevalence (Croy et al, 2014;Duncan et al, 2015;Hertenstein et al, 2006;Kusano & Kemmelmeier, 2020). We also recommend using a variety of our touch indices as dependent variables in future multilevel analyses.…”

Physical Activity Behaviour in 50- to 74-Year-Olds: Differences between Employed and Retired Individuals

“…Analysis of the data was carried out in a cross-sectional manner for each surveyed year by examining age as a continuous variable. Data was analysed longitudinally using multilevel analysis with repeated cross-sectional data [25][26][27]. The categorical variables of work status and education background were merged as the limited number of participants did not allow for statistical analysis.…”