What Makes People Support Public Responsibility for Welfare Provision: Self-interest or Political Ideology?
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article investigates which socio-economic and ideological factors make individuals support the normative principles of the welfare state. Two principal theoretical perspectives, relating to self-interest and the political ideology, respectively, have been proposed in the literature as causal explanations. However, as most studies utilize solely cross-sectional data, causal interpretations of which factors make people express support for the welfare state have so far been hard to sustain. This article, using panel data from the Canadian ‘Equality, Security, and Community’ survey and an extended random-effect model, exploits the longitudinal nature of the data and econometric methods to provide a more accurate analysis of the extent to which self-interest and political ideology actually determine support for welfare state principles. The empirical analysis indicates that both self-interest and political ideology variables to some extent are significant predictors of support for welfare state principles. In addition, the article discusses several avenues for future research.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it