Democracy and dictatorship revisited

2,317 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Energy consumption, human well-being and economic development in central and eastern European nations: A cautionary tale of sustainability (2014, background): “We note that there is some debate in the literature about how to measure democracy (Chiebug et al., 2009), but this is the most commonly employed measure of democratization in the environmental social sciences (e.”
Juking the Stats? Authoritarian Information Problems in China (2014, neutral): “The DD data, another commonly used dichotomous measure of dictatorship, codes country-years as dictatorial by making democracy the ‘restricted’ category (Cheibub, Gandhi, and Vreeland 2010).”
Intelligence and corruption (2012, methodology): “These indices have, however, been criticized on several grounds (Cheibub et al., 2010).”
Political Versus Economic Institutions in the Growth Process (2014, methodology): “Cheibub, and Limongi (2000) and updated by Cheibub, Ghandhi, and Vreeland (2010).”
Institutional quality dataset (2014, background): “…empirical institutional measures available in the literature is that some institutional measures provide a clear ordinal ranking, which are the measures that we use in this paper, while others such as Cheibub et al. (2010) are more focused on the classiﬁcation of different institutional frameworks.”