Libertarianism

A Politico-Psychological Analysis

Report generated

February 13, 2026

1 Study Characteristics

1.1 Items: Libertarianism

This report considers Libertarianism as a construct. Facets (State Control, Economic, Social Tradition, and State) are not considered.

Item Item Description
Lib1 [State Control] Military service ought to be voluntary
Lib2 [Soc-T] There should not be laws regulating the sexual activity between consenting adults
Lib3 [Soc-T] There should be no laws prohibiting adult possession and use of drugs
Lib4 [State Control] There should not be a National Identity card
Lib5 [Eco] No welfare and no restrictions on work
Lib6 [Soc-T] De-regulate drugs, alcohol, prostitution, gambling, and suicide
Lib7 [Eco] Eliminate the minimum wage in every state
Lib8 [State Control] Repeal all gun control laws and affirm the right to keep and bear arms
Lib9 [State Control] The government interferes far too much in our everyday lives
Lib10 [Soc-T] People should be free to decide which group-norms or traditions to follow
Lib11 [State] The government is practically always wasteful and inefficient
Lib12 [Eco] We should reduce taxes, spending, and eliminate controls on trade
Lib13 (reverse-coded) [Soc-T] The government main goal is to improve the common good, even if that limits the some of the civil liberties of individuals
Lib14 [State Control] Repeal Obama Care and don’t replace it with RomneyCare
Lib15 [Soc-T] Government should be kept out of the matter of abortion
Lib16 [State Control] It is OK for companies to deny service to anyone (gays or otherwise) as well as it is OK to boycott those companies
Lib17 [Eco] Abolish all regulation of banks in favor of free market
Lib18 [Eco] Free-market banking: unrestricted competition and no bailouts
Lib19 [Eco] Pass constitutional amendment requiring a balanced budget
Lib20 Oppose gerrymandering and restrictions on ballot access
Lib21 [Eco] Phase out government-sponsored retirement system
Lib22 [State Control] Repeal the Patriot Act and end state surveillance

Possible values:
Strongly agree (1) - Agree - Neither agree nor disagree (5) - Disagree - Strongly disagree (9)

Source:
Original item

1.2 Samples

N=1500

To conduct a exploratory and a confirmatory large surveys during the general election, we hired a professional survey firm (SSI, a US-based market research company that recruits participants from a panel of 7,139,027 American citizens; more information can be found at www.surveysampling.com (now https://www.dynata.com/) to recruit a nationally representative sample of 1,500 Americans (50.7% women) who completed study materials during the general election from August 16-September 9, 2016. (Information about sampling and exclusion criteria is included in the Supplement). The age distribution was as follows: 18-24 (12.9%), 25-34 (17.6%), 35-44 (17.5%), 45-54 (19.5%), 55-65 (15.6%) and older than 65 (16.9%). The ethnic breakdown was: White/European American (82.5%), Black/African American (7.7%), Latino (5.9%) and “Other” (4.0%). Concerning religion, 67.6% identified as Christian, 17.1% as religiously affiliated but not Christian, and 15.3% as Atheist/Agnostic. With respect to education 35.1% indicated “high school only or lower,” 31.4 % indicated “some college,” and 33.6% indicated having received a “Bachelor” or “Graduate” degree. 2424 participants were directed to the survey,1885 of which finished the survey (attrition rate 22%).

We followed recommendations to minimize the problem of careless responding in online studies. Specifically, we employed 10 random attention questions and time controls to check for data quality. There were 385 participants who failed more than one attention check or finished the survey in under ~22 minutes and were therefore excluded from the sample. For the 1500 participants who successfully finished the survey, completion time was 67 minutes on average (MD: 51min).

N=2119

Also through SSI we also recruited 2,119 American adults (21.5% women), who completed study materials from August 20-September 13, 2016. (Information about sampling and exclusion criteria is included in the Supplement). Age was distributed as follows: 18-24 (9.1%), 25-34 (13.8%), 35-44 (11.4%), 45-54 (2.7%), 55-65(3.6%), 65 and older (59.3%). The ethnic breakdown was: White/European American (85.9%), Black/African American (5.1%), Latino (4.1%), and “Other” (5.0%). In terms of religion, 70.7% identified as Christian, 15.7% as religiously affiliated but not Christian, and 13.7% as Atheist/Agnostic. With respect to educational status, 16.2% chose “high school or lower,” 40.4% reported “some college” and 43.4% had attained a “Bachelor” or “Graduate” degree. The median income category was $50,000-$74,999. 3425 participants were directed to the survey, 2,262 of which finished the survey (attrition rate 22 %).

We followed recommendations to minimize the problem of careless responding in online studies (Meade & Craig, 2012). Specifically, we employed 10 random attention questions and time controls to check for data quality. There were 543 participants who failed more than one attention check or finished the survey in under ~22 minutes and were therefore excluded from the sample. For the 2,119 participants who successfully finished the survey, completion time was 92 minutes on average (MD: 57min).

2 Descriptives

2.1 Means, SD, Range, & SE

Table 1: Descriptives
Descriptives for Libertarianism Items
vars n mean sd median min max range se
Lib1 1 1500 6.95 2.10 7.00 1.00 9.00 8.00 0.05
Lib2 2 1500 6.40 2.58 7.00 1.00 9.00 8.00 0.07
Lib3 3 1500 3.67 2.47 3.00 1.00 9.00 8.00 0.06
Lib4 4 1500 4.79 2.51 5.00 1.00 9.00 8.00 0.06
Lib5 5 1500 4.61 2.28 5.00 1.00 9.00 8.00 0.06
Lib6 6 1500 4.15 2.48 4.00 1.00 9.00 8.00 0.06
Lib7 7 1500 3.99 2.45 4.00 1.00 9.00 8.00 0.06
Lib8 8 1500 4.76 2.93 5.00 1.00 9.00 8.00 0.08
Lib9 9 1500 6.43 2.34 7.00 1.00 9.00 8.00 0.06
Lib10 10 1500 7.08 1.78 7.00 1.00 9.00 8.00 0.05
Lib11 11 1500 6.53 2.18 7.00 1.00 9.00 8.00 0.06
Lib12 12 1500 6.16 2.19 6.00 1.00 9.00 8.00 0.06
Lib13 13 1500 4.97 2.14 5.00 1.00 9.00 8.00 0.06
Lib14 14 1500 5.61 2.89 5.00 1.00 9.00 8.00 0.07
Lib15 15 1500 6.43 2.50 7.00 1.00 9.00 8.00 0.06
Lib16 16 1500 4.49 2.85 5.00 1.00 9.00 8.00 0.07
Lib17 17 1500 4.28 2.25 5.00 1.00 9.00 8.00 0.06
Lib18 18 1500 5.53 2.25 5.00 1.00 9.00 8.00 0.06
Lib19 19 1500 6.56 1.95 7.00 1.00 9.00 8.00 0.05
Lib20 20 1500 6.26 1.91 6.00 1.00 9.00 8.00 0.05
Lib21 21 1500 4.08 2.31 4.00 1.00 9.00 8.00 0.06
Lib22 22 1500 5.03 2.24 5.00 1.00 9.00 8.00 0.06
Mean 23 1500 5.40 1.03 5.32 2.45 8.82 6.36 0.03

2.2 Proportions

Figure 1: Proportion of each response categories for Libertarianism Items

2.3 Distributions

Figure 2: Distribution of reponses for Libertarianism Items

2.4 Correlations

Figure 3: Bivariate Spearmans’ correlations for Libertarianism
Figure 4: Bivariate Spearmans’ correlations for Libertarianism
Figure 5: Correlation Matrix of Libertarianism items, Spearman’s rank correlations

3 Demographics

3.1 Social Class

Figure 6: Libertarianismas grouped by SES


Figure 7: Raincloud Plots showing Libertarianism grouped by Social Class


Note on the Raincloud Plots

  • Statistical summary (top): Welch’s t-test (or ANOVA) results, effect size, confidence intervals, p-values, and sample sizes are shown above each plot.
  • Bayesian analysis (bottom): Log Bayes factor and credible intervals are reported below each plot.


Table 2: Libertarianism as grouped by SES
Libertarianism as grouped by SES
SES N Mean SD
Poor 38 0.11 1.10
Lower Middle Class 298 0.06 0.96
Middle Middle Class 679 0.05 0.95
Upper Middle Class 395 -0.13 1.08
Rich 90 -0.09 1.04


3.2 Gender

Figure 8: Libertarianismas grouped by Gender


Figure 9: Raincloud Plots showing Libertarianism grouped by Gender


Table 3: Libertarianism as grouped by Gender
Libertarianism as grouped by Gender
Gender N Mean SD
Female 760 -0.14 0.93
Male 740 0.14 1.04

3.3 Age

Figure 10: Libertarianism as grouped by Age


Figure 11: Raincloud Plots showing Libertarianism grouped by Age


Table 4: Libertarianism as grouped by Age
Libertarianism as grouped by Age
Age N Mean SD
18-24 years 193 0.11 1.03
25-34 years 264 -0.07 0.97
35-44 years 263 -0.02 1.09
45-54 years 292 -0.01 0.98
55-64 years 234 -0.17 0.96
65+ 254 0.17 0.95

3.4 Education

Table 5: Libertarianism as grouped by Education


Figure 12: Raincloud Plots showing Libertarianism grouped by Education


Table 6: Libertarianism as grouped by Education
Education N Mean SD
Less than High School 51 0.20 0.95
High School 475 0.16 0.98
Some College 471 -0.02 0.95
Bachelor 310 -0.12 1.01
Graduate 193 -0.19 1.12


3.5 Income Levels

Figure 13: Libertarianism as grouped by Income Levels


Figure 14: Raincloud Plots showing Libertarianism grouped by Income Levels


Table 7: Libertarianism as grouped by Income Levels
Libertarianism as grouped by Income Levels
Income Levels N Mean SD
$75,000-$99,999 192 -0.08 1.03
$35,000-$49,999 227 -0.07 0.94
$100,000-$149,999 160 -0.04 1.13
$50,000-$74,999 292 -0.02 1.02
Less than $15,000 178 0.01 1.01
$150,000 + 95 0.04 0.98
$25,000-$34,999 176 0.08 0.95
$15,000-$24,999 180 0.11 0.95

3.6 Ethnicity

Figure 15: Libertarianism as grouped by Ethnicity

Note on the Okabe-Ito color palette The Okabe-Ito color palette (seen above) is a set of colorblind-friendly categorical colors available in R. We are using this palette for graphs with non-ordered variables (e.g., groups, categories) for accessibility.

Figure 16: Raincloud Plots showing Libertarianism grouped by Ethnicity


Table 8: Libertarianism as grouped by Ethnicity
Libertarianism as grouped by Ethnicity
Ethnicity N Mean SD
Caucasian/European origin 1237 0.03 1.00
Black/African American 115 -0.25 0.95
Latino 88 -0.03 1.01
Asian/Pacific Islander 29 -0.18 1.06
Native American 13 0.46 1.22
Other 18 -0.13 0.98

3.7 Occupation

Figure 17: Libertarianism as grouped by Occupation


Figure 18: Raincloud Plots showing Libertarianism grouped by Occupation


Table 9: Libertarianism as grouped by Occupation
Libertarianism as grouped by Occupation
Occupation N Mean SD
Employed 768 -0.01 1.05
Retired 268 0.04 0.96
Unemployed 146 -0.01 0.89
Parent 104 0.05 0.95
Disabled 98 0.14 1.07
Student 85 -0.12 0.91
Full-time caregiver 31 -0.28 0.78

3.8 Area

Figure 19: Libertarianism as grouped by Area


Figure 20: Raincloud Plots showing Libertarianism grouped by Area


Table 10: Libertarianism as grouped by Area
Libertarianism as grouped by Area
Area N Mean SD
Urban 955 -0.08 1.02
Rural 545 0.14 0.96


3.9 Religious Affiliation

Figure 21: Libertarianism as grouped by Religious Affiliation


Figure 22: Raincloud Plots showing Libertarianism grouped by Religious Affiliation


Table 11: Libertarianism as grouped by Religion
Libertarianism as grouped by Religious Affiliation
Religious Affiliation N Mean SD
Christian 1014 0.04 0.97
Jewish 52 -0.67 1.00
Muslim 9 0.63 1.24
Atheist/Agnostic 230 -0.12 1.05
No religion 195 0.08 1.02



4 Political Behavior

4.1 Political Orientation

Figure 23: Correlation Matrix - Political Orientation



Figure 24: Political Orientation



Table 12: Models of Political Orientation (SPRI) & Libertarianism
  Political Orientation Social Political Orientation Economic Political Orientation Composite Political Orientation
Predictors Estimates CI p Estimates CI p Estimates CI p Estimates CI p
(Intercept) 5.31 5.19 – 5.42 <0.001 4.93 4.80 – 5.06 <0.001 5.48 5.36 – 5.60 <0.001 5.24 5.12 – 5.35 <0.001
Libertarianism 0.88 0.76 – 0.99 <0.001 0.87 0.74 – 1.01 <0.001 0.99 0.87 – 1.12 <0.001 0.92 0.80 – 1.03 <0.001
Observations 1500 1500 1500 1500
R2 / R2 adjusted 0.128 / 0.128 0.100 / 0.100 0.143 / 0.142 0.143 / 0.142



Table 13: Models of Ideo_SP_JJ and SRPI_CM, and Libertarianism Age + Inc + Religiosity + Edu
  Political Orientation Social Political Orientation Economic Political Orientation Composite Political Orientation
Predictors Estimates CI p Estimates CI p Estimates CI p Estimates CI p
(Intercept) -1.53 -2.21 – -0.86 <0.001 -1.72 -2.47 – -0.98 <0.001 -2.60 -3.35 – -1.85 <0.001 -1.95 -2.60 – -1.30 <0.001
Lib 0.74 0.64 – 0.84 <0.001 0.68 0.57 – 0.79 <0.001 0.90 0.79 – 1.01 <0.001 0.78 0.68 – 0.87 <0.001
Age 0.23 0.16 – 0.29 <0.001 0.23 0.16 – 0.30 <0.001 0.24 0.17 – 0.31 <0.001 0.23 0.17 – 0.30 <0.001
Income 0.08 0.02 – 0.14 0.006 -0.01 -0.07 – 0.06 0.854 0.12 0.06 – 0.19 <0.001 0.07 0.01 – 0.12 0.018
Religiosity 0.35 0.31 – 0.39 <0.001 0.47 0.43 – 0.51 <0.001 0.27 0.23 – 0.31 <0.001 0.36 0.33 – 0.40 <0.001
Education -0.04 -0.15 – 0.07 0.474 -0.09 -0.21 – 0.03 0.146 0.14 0.02 – 0.26 0.022 0.00 -0.10 – 0.11 0.937
Observations 1500 1500 1500 1500
R2 / R2 adjusted 0.337 / 0.334 0.364 / 0.362 0.288 / 0.286 0.370 / 0.368

4.2 Religiosity



Figure 25: Religiosity



4.3 Religiosity & Political Orientation

Figure 26: Religiosity - Correlation Matrix



4.4 Candidate Preferences



Figure 27: Candidate Preferences



Table 14: Candidate Preferences (centered)
Candidate Preferences and Libertarianism [centered]
Candidate Preference N Mean SD
Donald Trump 444 0.42 0.90
Hillary Clinton 371 -0.55 0.87
Bernie Sanders 362 -0.23 0.90
Ted Cruz 122 0.33 0.99
Jeb Bush 83 -0.12 0.74
Gary Johnson 68 0.43 0.98
Rand Paul 44 0.83 1.07



Table 15: Candidate Preferences (raw means)
Candidate Preferences and Libertarianism [raw means]
Candidate Preferences N Mean SD Range
Donald Trump 444 0.42 0.90 1-9
Hillary Clinton 371 -0.55 0.87 1-9
Bernie Sanders 362 -0.23 0.90 1-9
Ted Cruz 122 0.33 0.99 1-9
Jeb Bush 83 -0.12 0.74 1-9
Gary Johnson 68 0.43 0.98 1-9
Rand Paul 44 0.83 1.07 1-9



4.5 Party Preferences


Figure 28: Party Preferences



Table 16: Party Preferences (centered)
Party Preferences and Libertarianism [centered]
Party Preference N Mean SD
Green Party 40 -0.50 1.04
Democratic Party 560 -0.46 0.90
Don't know 90 0.00 0.78
None 120 0.16 0.99
Republican Party 508 0.24 0.88
Libertarian Party 100 0.61 1.05
Tea Party 68 0.90 0.90
Constitution Party 14 1.19 0.69



Table 17: Party Preferences (raw means)
Party Preferences and Libertarianism [raw means]
Party Preferences N Mean SD Range
Green Party 40 -0.50 1.04 1-9
Democratic Party 560 -0.46 0.90 1-9
Don't know 90 0.00 0.78 1-9
None 120 0.16 0.99 1-9
Republican Party 508 0.24 0.88 1-9
Libertarian Party 100 0.61 1.05 1-9
Tea Party 68 0.90 0.90 1-9
Constitution Party 14 1.19 0.69 1-9



4.6 Voting Preferences

Table 18: Voting Preferences
  2016 [Trump vs. Clinton] 2016 [Trump vs. Clinton] + Supporters 2012 [Romney vs. Obama] 2008 [McCain vs. Obama]
Predictors Odds Ratios CI p Odds Ratios CI p Odds Ratios CI p Odds Ratios CI p
(Intercept) 806.50 334.56 – 2033.08 <0.001 641.77 273.54 – 1569.67 <0.001 79.25 39.27 – 164.14 <0.001 64.89 32.30 – 133.62 <0.001
Libertarianism 0.29 0.24 – 0.34 <0.001 0.30 0.25 – 0.35 <0.001 0.46 0.40 – 0.52 <0.001 0.48 0.42 – 0.54 <0.001
Observations 1103 1148 1236 1206
R2 Tjur 0.260 0.246 0.132 0.122



Figure 29: Logistic Regression, Libertarianism & Voting Preferences

4.7 Party Identity



Figure 30: Party Identity



Figure 31: Party Identity and Voting



Table 19: Party Identity & Voting
Donald Trump Hilary Clinton
Strong Republican 282 7
Republican 166 24
Leaning Republican 58 7
Independent 17 16
Leaning Democrat 10 65
Democrat 27 129
Strong Democrat 4 323

4.8 Voting & Party Identity

Figure 32: Predicted, Voting & Party Identity



Table 20: Supporters
  2016 [Clinton vs. Trump] 2016 [Trump vs. Clinton] + Supporters
Predictors Odds Ratios CI p Odds Ratios CI p
(Intercept) 5306.25 1164.19 – 27344.52 <0.001 2613.28 657.50 – 11438.73 <0.001
Party Identity (dichotomous) 0.01 0.00 – 0.01 <0.001
Party Identity (dichotomous) 0.33 0.25 – 0.43 <0.001 0.36 0.28 – 0.46 <0.001
Libertarianism 0.01 0.00 – 0.01 <0.001
Observations 1103 1148
R2 Tjur 0.771 0.744



4.9 Likeability

4.10 Trump’s Likebility


Figure 33: Trump’s Likeability



4.11 Clinton’s Likebility


Figure 34: Clinton’s Likeability



4.12 Johnson’s Likeability


Figure 35: Johnson’s Likeability


5 Politico-Psychological correlates of Libertarianism



5.1 Ideologies and Partisanship


Figure 36: Correlates of Libertarianism



5.2 Populism, Nationalism, Nativism, and Patriotism


Figure 37: Correlates - Populism



5.3 Political Psychology


Figure 38: Correlates - Political Psychology



5.4 Social Justice Concerns, Empathy, and Prejudice


Figure 39: Correlates - Social Concerns



5.5 Values


Figure 40: Correlates - Values



5.6 Pot-Pourri


Figure 41: Correlates - Constructs



5.7 Positive and Negative correlates of Libertarianism


Figure 42: Correlates - Positive & significant associations



Figure 43: Correlates - Negative & significant associations

5.8 Section Summary


Table 21: Table of models 1
  Libertarianism Libertarianism Libertarianism Libertarianism Libertarianism
Predictors Estimates CI p Estimates CI p Estimates CI p Estimates CI p Estimates CI p
(Intercept) 4.55 4.41 – 4.69 <0.001 4.33 4.15 – 4.52 <0.001 5.70 5.49 – 5.91 <0.001 3.89 3.66 – 4.13 <0.001 4.38 4.17 – 4.59 <0.001
Social Dominance Orientation 0.23 0.19 – 0.26 <0.001
Right-Wing Authoritarianism 0.21 0.17 – 0.24 <0.001
System Justification -0.06 -0.10 – -0.02 0.003
Economic System Justification 0.31 0.26 – 0.36 <0.001
Gender-specific System Justification 0.19 0.15 – 0.22 <0.001
Observations 1500 1500 1500 1500 1500
R2 / R2 adjusted 0.100 / 0.100 0.086 / 0.085 0.006 / 0.005 0.098 / 0.098 0.062 / 0.061


Table 22: Table of models 2
  Libertarianism Libertarianism Libertarianism Libertarianism Libertarianism
Predictors Estimates CI p Estimates CI p Estimates CI p Estimates CI p Estimates CI p
(Intercept) 4.39 4.15 – 4.64 <0.001 3.89 3.10 – 4.69 <0.001 5.70 5.49 – 5.91 <0.001 3.89 3.66 – 4.13 <0.001 4.38 4.17 – 4.59 <0.001
SDO7_Dominance 0.09 0.01 – 0.17 0.030
SDO7_AntiEgal 0.23 0.17 – 0.30 <0.001
SDO7_Dominance:SDO7_AntiEgal -0.02 -0.03 – 0.00 0.090
RWA_Agression 0.21 0.02 – 0.39 0.028
RWA_Conventionalism 0.19 -0.02 – 0.40 0.079
RWA_Submission 0.06 -0.17 – 0.30 0.608
RWA_Agression:RWA_Conventionalism -0.02 -0.06 – 0.02 0.272
RWA_Agression:RWA_Submission -0.01 -0.05 – 0.04 0.715
RWA_Conventionalism:RWA_Submission -0.02 -0.06 – 0.03 0.399
RWA_Agression:RWA_Conventionalism:RWA_Submission 0.00 -0.00 – 0.01 0.437
SJ_Gen -0.06 -0.10 – -0.02 0.003
SJ_Eco 0.31 0.26 – 0.36 <0.001
SJ_Gender 0.19 0.15 – 0.22 <0.001
Observations 1500 1500 1500 1500 1500
R2 / R2 adjusted 0.114 / 0.113 0.096 / 0.092 0.006 / 0.005 0.098 / 0.098 0.062 / 0.061


Figure 44: Interaction with facets of SDO


Table 23: Linear Regression
Observations 1500
Dependent variable facet
Type OLS linear regression
F(1,1498) 166.87
R² 0.10
Adj. R² 0.10
Est. S.E. t val. p
(Intercept) 4.55 0.07 64.46 0.00
SDO 0.23 0.02 12.92 0.00
Standard errors: OLS