Institutional context and life satisfaction: does the rule of law moderate well-being inequalities?

IF 2.3 1区 社会学 Q2 SOCIOLOGY European Societies Pub Date : 2023-03-14 DOI:10.1080/14616696.2023.2185651
Francisco Olivos, Lei Jin
{"title":"Institutional context and life satisfaction: does the rule of law moderate well-being inequalities?","authors":"Francisco Olivos, Lei Jin","doi":"10.1080/14616696.2023.2185651","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT\n An emerging strand of research emphasizes the role of the macro institutional context in shaping the social distribution of well-being. This article examines the variations in the association between political power and subjective well-being by how the rule of law is instituted across societies. Two hypotheses of the rule of law role are tested: (a) power-tempering and (b) power-enhancement hypotheses. We use a unique dataset of 30,491 individuals from 27 countries with diverse social and political characteristics. We first confirmed the relationship between individuals’ perceptions of their positions in the power hierarchy and their overall satisfaction with their lives using models with country-level fixed effects. Moreover, this relationship significantly varies across countries, and the Rule of Law Index explains part of the variation, as indicated by random-effects models. In societies with well-defined, universally applicable, and fair laws, the association of one’s position of power and subjective well-being is reduced. Our study illustrates that institutions of better quality and functioning may equalize access to well-being.","PeriodicalId":47392,"journal":{"name":"European Societies","volume":"12 1","pages":"721 - 752"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Societies","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14616696.2023.2185651","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SOCIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

ABSTRACT An emerging strand of research emphasizes the role of the macro institutional context in shaping the social distribution of well-being. This article examines the variations in the association between political power and subjective well-being by how the rule of law is instituted across societies. Two hypotheses of the rule of law role are tested: (a) power-tempering and (b) power-enhancement hypotheses. We use a unique dataset of 30,491 individuals from 27 countries with diverse social and political characteristics. We first confirmed the relationship between individuals’ perceptions of their positions in the power hierarchy and their overall satisfaction with their lives using models with country-level fixed effects. Moreover, this relationship significantly varies across countries, and the Rule of Law Index explains part of the variation, as indicated by random-effects models. In societies with well-defined, universally applicable, and fair laws, the association of one’s position of power and subjective well-being is reduced. Our study illustrates that institutions of better quality and functioning may equalize access to well-being.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
制度背景与生活满意度:法治是否会缓和福利不平等?
一个新兴的研究链强调宏观制度背景在塑造福祉的社会分配中的作用。本文通过在社会中如何建立法治来考察政治权力和主观幸福感之间关系的变化。对法治作用的两种假设进行了检验:(a)权力调节假说和(b)权力增强假说。我们使用了一个独特的数据集,其中包括来自27个国家的30,491人,他们具有不同的社会和政治特征。我们首先使用具有国家级固定效应的模型,证实了个人对自己在权力等级中的地位的感知与他们对生活的总体满意度之间的关系。此外,这种关系在各国之间存在显著差异,正如随机效应模型所表明的那样,法治指数解释了部分差异。在法律明确、普遍适用和公平的社会中,一个人的权力地位和主观幸福感的联系就会减少。我们的研究表明,质量和功能更好的机构可能会平等地获得幸福。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
European Societies
European Societies SOCIOLOGY-
CiteScore
15.70
自引率
1.20%
发文量
40
期刊介绍: European Societies, the flagship journal of the European Sociological Association, aims to promote and share sociological research related to Europe. As a generalist sociology journal, we welcome research from all areas of sociology. However, we have a specific focus on addressing the socio-economic and socio-political challenges faced by European societies, as well as exploring all aspects of European social life and socioculture. Our journal is committed to upholding ethical standards and academic independence. We conduct a rigorous and anonymous review process for all submitted manuscripts. This ensures the quality and integrity of the research we publish. European Societies encourages a plurality of perspectives within the sociology discipline. We embrace a wide range of sociological methods and theoretical approaches. Furthermore, we are open to articles that adopt a historical perspective and engage in comparative research involving Europe as a whole or specific European countries. We also appreciate comparative studies that include societies beyond Europe. In summary, European Societies is dedicated to promoting sociological research with a focus on European societies. We welcome diverse methodological and theoretical approaches, historical perspectives, and comparative studies involving Europe and other societies.
期刊最新文献
Settling into uncertainty and risk amidst the COVID-19 pandemic and the war in Ukraine Gender compositions of occupations and firms jointly shape switches from gender-atypical towards more gender-typical positions The effect of the month of birth on academic achievement: heterogeneity by social origin and gender Do they think that joy and misery are temporary? Comparing trajectories of current and predicted life satisfaction across life events Narrowing inequalities through redistribution. A relational inequality approach to female managers and the gender wage gap
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1