2010
DOI: 10.1016/j.jpubeco.2009.11.002
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The looks of a winner: Beauty and electoral success

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

23
337
3
6

Year Published

2010
2010
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 318 publications
(369 citation statements)
references
References 18 publications
(26 reference statements)
23
337
3
6
Order By: Relevance
“…In our model, however, the up-front payment is not a bond but a sunk cost. Similar to our model, Glaeser and Shleifer (2002) argue that independent judiciaries are vulnerable to taking bribes. While they focus on explaining why independent and dependent judiciaries have come about (in 12th century England and France) we study their affect on the distributions of rents.…”
supporting
confidence: 59%
See 3 more Smart Citations
“…In our model, however, the up-front payment is not a bond but a sunk cost. Similar to our model, Glaeser and Shleifer (2002) argue that independent judiciaries are vulnerable to taking bribes. While they focus on explaining why independent and dependent judiciaries have come about (in 12th century England and France) we study their affect on the distributions of rents.…”
supporting
confidence: 59%
“…According to La Porta et al (1999) and Djankov et al (2002), GNP per capita, the absolute value of the latitude of the country and the religions Protestantism, Catholicism and Islam may help explain corruption, bureaucratic delays and regulation. We therefore control for these variables (logGNP, LAT, PROT, CATH and MUSLIM).…”
Section: Datamentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…For instance, attractiveness increases the candidate's number of votes and thereby the likelihood of being elected (Berggren, Jordahl, and Poutvaara (2010) and Rosar, Klein, and Beckers (2008)). Antonakis and Dalgas (2009) suggest that underlying the effect of physical attractiveness is the voters' belief that attractive candidates are more competent.…”
Section: Literaturementioning
confidence: 99%