Do Inequality-adjusted HDI and Interpersonal trust go together across countries?

Across 98 countries the link before adjusting for anything is r = +0.59, on a scale from -1 (opposite) to +1 (in step). A version that uses only each country's rank gives +0.70.

Does the link hold within countries over time, not just across countries?

There are not enough years of data within countries to check this over time.

Does Inequality-adjusted HDI cause Interpersonal trust?

This analysis cannot answer that. It shows only that the two go together. A link between two country measures, adjusted or not, does not show that either one changes the other. Country figures also say nothing about individual people.

Inequality-adjusted HDI vs. Interpersonal trust

Holds up after adjusting for income

Across 98 countries, Inequality-adjusted HDI and Interpersonal trust rise and fall together at r = +0.59 (on a scale from −1 to +1, where 0 means no link). Comparing only countries with similar income (GDP per person) shrinks it to +0.15 (q = 0.032, allowing for the many pairs tested). Much of the first figure is that both measures rise with national income, but a very weak positive link remains. Caution: direction is not consistent across regions.

Comparing countries across the middle half of interpersonal trust, 12.9% to 31.6% of respondents, inequality-adjusted hdi is better by 0.112 points at the top of that range than the bottom. Comparing only countries with similar national income, the gap is 0.0116 points.

Link before adjusting (r)+0.593p = 1.2e-10 · 98 countries

After adjusting for national income+0.146p = 0.153 · likely range [-0.05, +0.34]

p, allowing for regions0.039standard error 0.056 · 7 regions

Check for luck (q)0.032across 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.

Inequality-adjusted HDI · index, 0 to 1link with income +0.94 · proxy

Interpersonal trust · % of respondentslink with income +0.66 · high

Both of these rise and fall closely with national income, so a strong link between them before adjusting was close to certain. Read the adjusted figure, not the first one.

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

Every country as a dot

best-fit line line after adjusting

Four ways to measure the link

Method	r	p	Countries
Standard (Pearson), not adjusted	+0.593	1.2e-10	98
By rank (Spearman), not adjusted	+0.697	1.6e-15	98
Standard (Pearson), adjusted for national income	+0.146	0.153	98
By rank (Spearman), adjusted for national income	+0.226	0.026	98

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 98 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: +0.447 (a minus sign means it grew).

How solid is it?

Leaving out one country at a time, r ranges from +0.125 (without FIN) to +0.171 (without CHN). 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: CHN (+0.024).

Fragile: this link may not hold up.

direction is not consistent across regions

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.

	n	r
East Asia & Pacific	14	+0.31
Europe & Central Asia	47	+0.53
Latin America & Caribbean	12	-0.05

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.

	n	r
Poorest third	33	+0.07
Middle third	32	+0.09
Richest third	33	+0.70

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.

	n	r
Christians	60	+0.14
Muslims	23	+0.06

By last european coloniser

	n	r
Never a European colony	14	-0.15
Spain	12	-0.31
United Kingdom	21	+0.29

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 = +0.120 after dropping 6 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

	index, 0 to 1	% of respondents	Years
Iceland ISL	0.923	62.3%	2023, 2022
Norway NOR	0.909	72.1%	2023, 2022
Denmark DNK	0.909	73.9%	2023, 2022
Switzerland CHE	0.894	58.5%	2023, 2022
Netherlands NLD	0.892	57%	2023, 2022
Finland FIN	0.891	68.4%	2023, 2022
Belgium BEL	0.891	35.7%	2023, 2010
Germany DEU	0.89	41.6%	2023, 2022
Sweden SWE	0.886	62.8%	2023, 2022
Ireland IRL	0.886	37.3%	2023, 2010
Slovenia SVN	0.885	25.3%	2023, 2022
Australia AUS	0.873	48.5%	2023, 2022
United Kingdom GBR	0.869	43.3%	2023, 2022
Czechia CZE	0.867	27.3%	2023, 2022
Canada CAN	0.867	46.7%	2023, 2022

United Nations Development Programme, Human Development Report 2025
Haerpfer, C. et al., World Values Survey; EVS, European Values Study

Sources

Inequality-adjusted HDI

Inequality-adjusted Human Development Index

United Nations Development Programme, Human Development Report Office · via Our World in Data · CC BY 3.0 IGO · updated annual · comparable from 2010 only

The HDI marked down for how unequally each of its three parts is spread within the country. The gap between this and the HDI is what inequality costs, and that is the number worth reading. The level itself is the HDI again, with its parts flagged the same way.

Interpersonal trust

Share agreeing that most people can be trusted

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 share who answer "most people can be trusted" rather than "you can't be too careful". Trust in other people is the classic measure of social ties (social capital). It is only loosely linked to national income. That makes it one of the few measures here where adjusting for GDP is a real test, not a foregone result. The survey runs in waves, not every year. So data for each country are sparse and uneven, and two readings for a country may be five or more years apart.

How this was computed

Data used: most recent value in 2010-2025; values come from 2010–2023. 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 Inequality-adjusted HDI and Interpersonal trust

This page shows that two measures go together. It does not show that Inequality-adjusted HDI changes Interpersonal trust, or the reverse. These figures also describe countries, not individual people. See the ecological fallacy.