Income and Education as the Determinants of Anti-Corruption Attitudes: Evidence from Indonesia

  • Anita K. Zonebia Universitas Padjadjaran
  • Arief Anshory Yusuf Universitas Padjadjaran
  • Heriyaldi Heriyaldi Universitas Padjadjaran
Keywords: corruption, anti-corruption, development, Indonesia


A higher level of corruption is found to be associated with a lower level of income in most cross-country studies. However, at any given income level, education can also be a very important determinant of the level of corruption, and failing to include education may bias or overestimate the importance of income. We estimated an empirical model of an individual’s attitude toward anti-corruption using a large sample of 9,020 individuals who represent the Indonesian population and found that the effect of income (measured by expenditure) is either weakened or eliminated when we controlled for the level of education. The effect of education is also found to exhibit a nonlinear pattern, which implies that investing in education will have increasing returns in the form of an anti-corruption attitude. This finding supports the view that increasing access to education is an effective measure to reduce corruption norms, particularly in developing countries.


Alatas, V., Cameron, L., Chaudhuri, A., Erkal, N., & Gangadharan, L. (2006). Gender and corruption: insights from an experimental analysis. Research Paper 974. Department of Economics, The University of Melbourne. 00002509 01 974.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y.

Alfonso, H. M. D. (2013). Corruption and Education. A Work Project, presented as part of the requirements for the Award of a Masters Degree in Economics from the NOVA – School of Business and Economics.

Bardhan, P. (1997). Corruption and development: a review of issues. Journal of Economic Literature, 35(3), 1320-1346.

BPS. (2014, January 2). Indeks Perilaku Anti Korupsi (IPAK) Indonesia 2013 sebesar 3,63 dari skala 0 sampai 5. Berita Resmi Statistik No. 07/01/Th. XVII. Badan Pusat Statistik.–ipak–indonesia-2013-sebesar-3-63-dari-skala-0-sampai-5-.html.

Chatterjee, I., & Ray, R. (2012). Does the evidence on corruption depend on how it is measured? Results from a cross-country study on microdata sets. Applied Economics, 44(25), 3215-3227. doi:

Cressey, D. R. (1950). The criminal violation of financial trust. American Sociological Review, 15(6), 738-743. doi: 10.2307/2086606.

Cressey, D. R. (1953). Other people’s money: A study in the social psychology of embezzlement. New York: Free Press.

Dollar, D., Fisman, R., & Gatti, R. (2001). Are women really the “fairer” sex? Corruption and women in government. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 46(4), 423-429. doi:

Dong, B., Dulleck, U., & Torgler, B. (2012). Conditional corruption. Journal of Economic Psychology, 33(3), 609-627. doi:

Esarey, J., & Chirillo, G. (2013). “Fairer sex” or purity myth? Corruption, gender, and institutional context. Politics & Gender, 9(4), 361-389. doi:

Fisman, R., & Miguel, E. (2006). Cultures of corruption: evidence from diplomatic parking tickets. NBER Working Paper Series 12312. National Bureau of Economic Research.

Francken, N., Minten, B., & Swinnen, J. F. (2005). Listen to the Radio! Media and Corruption: Evidence from Madagascar. PRG Working Papers 31872. Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, LICOS - Centre for Institutions and Economic Performance.

Gatti, R., Paternostro, S., & Rigolini, J. (2003). Individual attitudes toward corruption: do social effects matter?. TheWorld Bank. 1596/1813-9450-3122.

Goel, R. K., & Nelson, M. A. (2007). Are corrupt acts contagious?: Evidence from the United States. Journal of Policy Modeling, 29(6), 839-850. doi:

Gokcekus, O., & Kn¨orich, J. (2006). Does quality of openness affect corruption?. Economics Letters, 91(2), 190-196. doi:

Guerrero, M. A., & Rodr´ıguez-Oreggia, E. (2008). On the individual decisions to commit corruption: A methodological complement. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 65(2), 357-372. doi:

Hauk, E., & Saez-Marti, M. (2002). On the cultural transmission of corruption. Journal of Economic Theory, 107(2), 311-335. doi:

Melgar, N., Rossi, M., & TomW. Smith. (2010). The perception of corruption. Documentos de Trabajo 05/08. Department of Economics - dECON, Facultad de Ciencias Sociales. Universidad de la Rep´ ublica.

Montinola, G. R., & Jackman, R. W. (2002). Sources of corruption: A cross-country study. British Journal of Political Science, 32(1), 147-170. doi:

Olken, B. A. (2009). Corruption perceptions vs. corruption reality. Journal of Public Economics, 93(7-8), 950-964. doi:

Ortega, D. L., Florax, R. J., & Delbecq, B. A. (2010). Primary determinants and the spatial distribution of corruption. Working Paper # 10-6. Dept. of Agricultural Economics, Purdue University.

Paldam, M. (2002). The cross-country pattern of corruption: economics, culture and the seesaw dynamics. European Journal of Political Economy, 18(2), 215-240. doi:

Sandholtz, W., & Koetzle, W. (2000). Accounting for corruption: Economic structure, democracy, and trade. International Studies Quarterly, 44(1), 31-50. doi:

Swamy, A., Knack, S., Lee, Y., & Azfar, O. (2001). Gender and corruption. Journal of Development Economics, 64(1), 25-55. doi:

Treisman, D. (2000). The causes of corruption: a cross-national study. Journal of Public Economics, 76(3), 399-457. doi:

Treisman, D. (2007). What have we learned about the causes of corruption from ten years of cross-national empirical research?. Annual Review of Political Science, 10, 211-244. doi:

Truex, R. (2011). Corruption, attitudes, and education: Survey evidence from Nepal. World Development, 39(7), 1133-1142. doi:

How to Cite
Zonebia, A., Yusuf, A., & Heriyaldi, H. (2020). Income and Education as the Determinants of Anti-Corruption Attitudes: Evidence from Indonesia. Jurnal Ekonomi Indonesia, 8(1), 153-170. Retrieved from