EXAMPLE II: The Relationship Between Political Development & ModernizationModernization theory was developed by comparative political scientists and sociologiststo explain the causal relationship between political development and economic development. Thetheory states that variables such as high levels of industrialization, per capita GNP, urbanizationand education will lead to increases in the level of democratic participation. (Lipsett, 75).Modernization in a country is marked by industrialization, characterized by high levels ofeconomic growth and the displacement of primitive modes of production. Industrializationcreates a demand for labor in urban areas; at the same time, the extension of capitalist investmentand production into rural areas makes it increasingly difficult to maintain a rural subsistencelifestyle. The rural population, which makes up the majority in the early states of modernization,is characterized as uneducated, diffuse and with little structural opportunity for collective action.As more and more rural dwellers migrate to urban areas, the new urban class finds itself ina context much more conducive to collective action and political participation. Industrialemployment creates shared interests for workers as a class, often leading to the formation of tradeunions to bargain for better working conditions. The urban setting is also more conducive toincreased levels of education, both because people live closer to one another, and because themore complex milieu of the city requires a higher level of intellectual skills in order to survive.The combination of newly created societal wealth, higher levels of education, andincreased collective activity by the working class leads this group to demand a greater share in thesociety’s resources. Because of high rates of economic growth, governments and societal elitesare more willing to bargain with the lower classes and to begin to share the newly created wealth. Because the lower classes wish to maintain some control over societies resources in the future aswell, a significant factor in their demands is the extension of political participation. The processof industrialization, then, with its concurrent aspects of increased levels of education, urbanizationand economic growth, provides the conditions in which both the lower classes demand and theelite groups grant the extension of political participation.The data provided in the “DISORDER” DATA SET describe eighty six countriesaccording to a number of economic, political and social categories. This paper will discuss thecorrelation between political development, defined as mature, participatory democracy, to level ofeconomic development, GNP per capita, level of urbanization and percentage of primary andsecondary school enrollments in the 15-19 age group. Level of democracy was defined incategories of: (1) personalist; (2) elitist; (3) centrist; (4) new democracy; and (5) old democracy. I am treating the level of economic development of a country as an indication of its level ofindustrialization, categorized as: (1) High (developed); (2) Medium (transitional); and (3) Low(low). Each independent variable will be analyzed separately in its relationship with the dependentvariable of political development.Statistical analysis demonstrates a high correlation between each independent variable andthe level of political development. Each correlation is above (.52), with the highest correlationsbetween economic level and political development (-.73), and GNP and political development(.68). The measures of the level of political development and level of economic development arenegatively correlated because a high rate of economic development is coded as a low ordinalvalue, while the reverse is true for political development. Bivariate regression for the relationshipbetween Political development and each of the independent variable confirms that thesecorrelations are statistically significant at the 95% level of confidence (p< .000 in each case). Thismakes sense because the sample, in fact, makes up a large percentage of the total population ofcountries in the world.Regression also provides R² of each of the independent variables on political developmentranging from 27.7 to 52.8%. The statistical results allow us to conclude a significant relationshipbetween each dependent variable, industrialization (economic level), urbanization, educationlevels, per capita GNP and the independent variable of political development. The data give goodsupport for the relationship between the different aspects of modernization and democracy. However, as regression analysis demonstrates, there is significant unaccounted for error withineach of the regression models. Statistical analysis does not show causation, but rather relation. According to the regression of political development against industrialization (economic level) inparticular, we might conclude that industrialization will be an important condition for democracy,but not a sufficient one.Besides the error unaccounted for in the statistical models, there are other problems whichshould be noted in drawing conclusions about the relationships between the variables. First,assigning different countries to different categories is necessary for purposes of quantification;but, it is also somewhat arbitrary. For instance, what criteria were used to decide whether or nota country was elitist or centrist? What level of industrialization was used to categorize a countryas ‘high’ as opposed to ‘medium?” In order to clearly interpret the results of such statistical data,it is necessary to consider the background criteria for quantification.In addition, it is important to point out that the regression analysis may be affected byassigning different countries to ordinal categories, in the cases political cluster and economiccluster. The variable shave been assigned discrete values according to the data set; but we assumethat we are using grouped data, and that countries in each category will be distributed around themean of that category. For instance, for countries in the middle economic cluster (#3), we canassume that some members of this group are closer to the lower category (#4) and some arecloser to the higher one (#5). So, even though the categories are presented as discrete, we areassuming that the underlying sample is actually interval; and we interpret the regression analyseswith this in mind.Statistical