placestats

Civil liberties (FH) vs. Religion very important

Fades after adjusting for income

A country is not a person. Countries where more people are counted as belonging to this group also tend to differ on the other measure, and that is all. It does not follow that the people in the group are the people with the different score. Making that leap is called the ecological fallacy: reading a pattern across places as a fact about individual people. It is the most common misuse of this kind of data. Religion also varies strongly with region, history and national income, so much of what looks religious here is really those. That is what the adjusted figures are for. The religion shares are estimates for two years only, and the survey questions are asked in rounds that can be ten years apart.

Across 105 countries, Civil liberties (FH) and Religion very important rise and fall together at r = +0.57 (on a scale from −1 to +1, where 0 means no link). Comparing only countries with similar income (GDP per person) shrinks it to +0.28, which could easily be chance (q = 0.42, allowing for the many pairs tested, and allowing for countries in the same region being alike). So the first figure mostly shows richer countries differing from poorer ones, not a link between these two things.

Comparing countries across the middle half of civil liberties (fh), 1 to 5 points, religion very important is 36.5% of respondents higher at the top of that range than the bottom. Comparing only countries with similar national income, the gap is 18.9% of respondents.

Link before adjusting (r)+0.567p = 3.0e-10 · 105 countries
After adjusting for national income+0.284p = 0.003 · likely range [+0.10, +0.45]
p, allowing for regions0.217standard error 0.206 · 7 regions
Check for luck (q)0.421across 12,497 pairs

How to read these.r runs from −1 (one goes up as the other goes down) to +1 (they rise together), and 0 means no link. Adjusting for national income means comparing countries with the same GDP per person, so differences in wealth can’t explain the link. Income is used in percentage terms, since an extra $1,000 means more to a poor country than to a rich one. p is how likely a link this strong would be if there were really none. Below 0.05 means it is unlikely to be chance. Very small values are written in short form: 1.1e-32 means a decimal point followed by 31 zeros and then 11, so very close to zero. The likely range is where the true figure probably lies, and a range that crosses zero means the link could easily be chance. Countries in the same region tend to resemble each other, so the third figure allows for that, which gives a fairer p. The standard error is the typical size of the error in r. Finally, testing this many pairs means some will look strong by luck alone. A q below 0.05 means this link is unlikely to be one of those.

Civil liberties (FH) · rating (1-7, 1 = most free)link with income -0.49 · moderate
Religion very important · % of respondentslink with income -0.66 · high

“Link with income” is how closely each measure tracks GDP per person across countries, from −1 to +1.

Every country as a dot

Civil liberties (FH) · rating (1-7, 1 = most free) →Religion very important · % of respondents →173.25%98.9%Albania: 3 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 24.4% of respondentsAndorra: 1 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 9.46% of respondentsArgentina: 2 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 24.3% of respondentsArmenia: 4 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 52.7% of respondentsAustralia: 1 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 13.8% of respondentsAustria: 1 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 13.9% of respondentsAzerbaijan: 7 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 15.9% of respondentsBelgium: 1 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 13.2% of respondentsBurkina Faso: 5 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 82.9% of respondentsBangladesh: 4 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 94.2% of respondentsBulgaria: 2 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 21.9% of respondentsBosnia and Herzegovina: 3 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 39.8% of respondentsBelarus: 7 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 19.7% of respondentsBolivia: 3 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 58.4% of respondentsBrazil: 3 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 45.1% of respondentsCanada: 1 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 15.5% of respondentsSwitzerland: 1 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 11.3% of respondentsChile: 1 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 20.7% of respondentsChina: 6 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 3.25% of respondentsColombia: 3 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 58.4% of respondentsCyprus: 2 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 50.5% of respondentsCzechia: 1 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 7.67% of respondentsGermany: 1 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 13.5% of respondentsDenmark: 1 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 5.73% of respondentsAlgeria: 5 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 90.7% of respondentsEcuador: 3 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 53.6% of respondentsEgypt, Arab Rep.: 6 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 97.3% of respondentsSpain: 1 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 17.2% of respondentsEstonia: 1 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 6.54% of respondentsEthiopia: 6 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 92.8% of respondentsFinland: 1 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 11% of respondentsFrance: 2 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 14.3% of respondentsUnited Kingdom: 1 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 15.6% of respondentsGeorgia: 4 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 69.6% of respondentsGhana: 2 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 91.1% of respondentsGreece: 2 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 54.8% of respondentsGuatemala: 4 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 51.5% of respondentsHong Kong SAR, China: 4 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 10.7% of respondentsCroatia: 2 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 20.6% of respondentsHaiti: 5 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 28% of respondentsHungary: 3 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 16.1% of respondentsIndonesia: 4 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 98.1% of respondentsIndia: 4 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 64.2% of respondentsIreland: 1 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 27.7% of respondentsIran, Islamic Rep.: 7 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 70.5% of respondentsIraq: 6 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 87.6% of respondentsIceland: 1 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 13.2% of respondentsItaly: 2 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 24.9% of respondentsJordan: 5 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 95.4% of respondentsJapan: 1 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 4.58% of respondentsKazakhstan: 5 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 28.7% of respondentsKenya: 4 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 86.7% of respondentsKyrgyz Republic: 5 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 56% of respondentsKorea, Rep.: 2 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 10.3% of respondentsKuwait: 5 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 86.5% of respondentsLebanon: 4 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 64.1% of respondentsLibya: 6 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 97.9% of respondentsLithuania: 2 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 12.2% of respondentsLuxembourg: 1 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 16.8% of respondentsLatvia: 2 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 8.84% of respondentsMorocco: 5 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 89% of respondentsMoldova: 3 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 32.9% of respondentsMaldives: 5 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 95.7% of respondentsMexico: 4 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 50.5% of respondentsNorth Macedonia: 3 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 53.7% of respondentsMali: 5 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 88.2% of respondentsMalta: 1 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 58.7% of respondentsMyanmar: 7 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 81% of respondentsMontenegro: 3 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 63.1% of respondentsMongolia: 2 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 8.76% of respondentsMalaysia: 4 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 72.4% of respondentsNigeria: 5 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 93.4% of respondentsNicaragua: 6 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 60% of respondentsNetherlands: 1 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 11.9% of respondentsNorway: 1 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 11.2% of respondentsNew Zealand: 1 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 14.5% of respondentsPakistan: 5 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 89.6% of respondentsPeru: 3 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 44.6% of respondentsPhilippines: 4 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 88.9% of respondentsPoland: 2 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 37.3% of respondentsPuerto Rico (US): 1 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 64.9% of respondentsPortugal: 1 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 20.1% of respondentsQatar: 5 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 98.9% of respondentsRomania: 2 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 48.2% of respondentsRussian Federation: 6 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 17.4% of respondentsRwanda: 6 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 40.3% of respondentsSingapore: 4 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 34% of respondentsSerbia: 3 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 25.3% of respondentsSlovak Republic: 1 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 22.2% of respondentsSlovenia: 1 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 11.5% of respondentsSweden: 1 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 9.48% of respondentsThailand: 5 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 41.8% of respondentsTajikistan: 7 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 63.1% of respondentsTrinidad and Tobago: 2 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 78.5% of respondentsTunisia: 4 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 90.6% of respondentsTurkiye: 6 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 60% of respondentsUkraine: 4 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 19.5% of respondentsUruguay: 1 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 19.5% of respondentsUnited States: 2 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 37.1% of respondentsUzbekistan: 6 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 45.1% of respondentsViet Nam: 6 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 12.3% of respondentsKosovo: 4 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 47.1% of respondentsSouth Africa: 2 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 55.8% of respondentsZambia: 4 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 75.7% of respondentsZimbabwe: 5 rating (1-7, 1 = most free), 87.7% of respondentsAZEBLRCHNDNKEGYESTGHAJPNLBYMMRPRITTO

best-fit line line after adjusting

Four ways to measure the link

MethodrpCountries
Standard (Pearson), not adjusted+0.5673.0e-10105
By rank (Spearman), not adjusted+0.5971.7e-11105
Standard (Pearson), adjusted for national income+0.2840.003105
By rank (Spearman), adjusted for national income+0.2720.005105

The rank version uses only each country’s place in line, from lowest to highest, so a few extreme countries count for less. The adjusted and unadjusted versions use the same 105 countries: those that report both measures and GDP per person. So the gap between them comes from the adjustment, not from a change in which countries are counted. Drop in the size of r after adjusting: +0.283 (a minus sign means it grew).

How solid is it?

Leaving out one country at a time, r ranges from +0.216 (without QAT) to +0.327 (without AZE). The bar above shows that range on a scale from −1 to +1, with the solid line at the full result. The single country that moves r most: QAT (-0.068).

Within each region

Countries are not separate, unrelated cases, and neighbors share a lot. A link that holds inside each region is far more believable than one that shows up only when comparing regions.

nr
East Asia & Pacific14+0.13
Europe & Central Asia49+0.14
Latin America & Caribbean14+0.47
Middle East, North Africa, Afghanistan & Pakistan13+0.53

By income third

If the link shows up only in the richest third of countries, it is a feature of rich countries, not a general pattern.

nr
Poorest third35-0.02
Middle third35+0.18
Richest third35+0.64

By largest religious group

Countries grouped by a label they share, such as main religion, rather than by a number. Groups of fewer than twelve countries are not shown. These groups differ in income, region and history all at once. So a gap between them is a place to start asking questions, not an answer.

nr
Christians62-0.04
Muslims28+0.01

By last european coloniser

Countries grouped by a label they share, such as main religion, rather than by a number. Groups of fewer than twelve countries are not shown. These groups differ in income, region and history all at once. So a gap between them is a place to start asking questions, not an answer.

nr
Never a European colony15+0.27
Spain12+0.16
United Kingdom25+0.70

Without outliers (countries far outside the middle half of countries on either measure, by more than one and a half times the width of that middle half): r = +0.284 after dropping 0 countries.

Two series, one country

Both measures over the years for one country you pick. The two charts are stacked so they share only the years along the bottom.

Loading…

Over time, within countries

Everything above compares countries with each other at one moment. This section compares each country only with itself over 0years. So a link here can’t come from anything about a country that stays the same, such as its history, geography, institutions or culture.

Not enough history inside each country to look at this over time. That needs countries measured for several years in a row, and at least one of these measures is measured too rarely.

The data


rating (1-7, 1 = most free)
% of respondents		Years
Tajikistan TJK763.1%2025, 2022
Myanmar MMR781%2025, 2022
Iran, Islamic Rep. IRN770.5%2025, 2022
Belarus BLR719.7%2025, 2022
Azerbaijan AZE715.9%2025, 2022
Viet Nam VNM612.3%2025, 2022
Uzbekistan UZB645.1%2025, 2022
Turkiye TUR660%2025, 2022
Rwanda RWA640.3%2025, 2014
Russian Federation RUS617.4%2025, 2022
Nicaragua NIC660%2025, 2022
Libya LBY697.9%2025, 2022
Iraq IRQ687.6%2025, 2022
Ethiopia ETH692.8%2025, 2022
Egypt, Arab Rep. EGY697.3%2025, 2022

Freedom House, Freedom in the World
Haerpfer, C. et al., World Values Survey; EVS, European Values Study

Sources

Civil liberties (FH)

Civil liberties rating

Freedom House · via Our World in Data · Free to use with attribution · updated annual

Scored 1 to 7, where 1 is most free. Covers freedom of speech and belief, the right to form groups, the rule of law and personal freedom. The same expert review process produces the political rights rating, so the two are bound to match closely.

Religion very important

Share saying religion is very important in their life

World Values Survey Association and European Values Study · via Our World in Data · Free for non-commercial use with attribution · updated irregular (survey waves, roughly every 5 years)

The strongest of four answers. The others are "rather", "not very" and "not at all" important. Thinking religion is important is different from attending services, and the gap between them is the interesting part. The United States reports high importance while attendance falls. Several Catholic countries show the reverse. No "better" direction is set, for the same reason as attendance. The survey runs in waves, not every year.

How this was computed

Data used: most recent value in 2010-2025; values come from 2010–2025. To adjust for income, each measure is first predicted from GDP per person (in percentage terms, on a log scale) with a straight-line fit. Only what is left over is then compared. This is called a partial correlation. The line is drawn the standard way (ordinary least squares), which picks the line that comes closest to all the countries at once. The error margins allow for countries in the same region resembling each other, using 7 World Bank regions. The q-value corrects for testing all 12,497 pairs at once, using the Benjamini–Hochberg method. Underlying data last updated DYB 2024. How the country data works · explore Civil liberties (FH) and Religion very important

This page shows that two measures go together. It does not show that Civil liberties (FH) changes Religion very important, or the reverse. These figures also describe countries, not individual people. See the ecological fallacy.

More links with Civil liberties (FH) or Religion very important