Maldives vs Zambia: Respect for Counterarguments Score
Maldives
0.53
in 2025
Zambia
0.537
in 2025
Maldives rank
86th
Zambia rank
83rd
Respect for Counterarguments Score over time
- Maldives
- Zambia
How they compare
Zambia currently reports 0.537 against 0.53 in Maldives, a difference of 0.007.
The two have swapped places 3 times across 115 shared years of data; in 1911 it was Maldives ahead.
Maldives ranks 86th and Zambia ranks 83rd of 175 countries.
Across the 12 decades both report, Maldives averaged higher in 6 and Zambia in 6.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Maldives | Zambia | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1910s | -1.3 | -1.57 | 0.269 | Maldives |
| 1920s | -1.3 | -1.57 | 0.269 | Maldives |
| 1930s | -1.3 | -1.57 | 0.269 | Maldives |
| 1940s | -1.3 | -1.57 | 0.269 | Maldives |
| 1950s | -1.3 | -1.57 | 0.269 | Maldives |
| 1960s | -1.3 | -0.2596 | 1.04 | Zambia |
| 1970s | -1.35 | 0.1252 | 1.48 | Zambia |
| 1980s | -1.79 | -0.034 | 1.76 | Zambia |
| 1990s | -1.79 | 1.04 | 2.83 | Zambia |
| 2000s | -0.803 | 1.9 | 2.71 | Zambia |
| 2010s | 0.2012 | 0.8013 | 0.6001 | Zambia |
| 2020s | 0.8568 | 0.3657 | 0.4912 | Maldives |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher respect for counterarguments score, Maldives or Zambia?
- Zambia, at 0.537 against 0.53 in Maldives as of 2025.
- What is the difference in respect for counterarguments score between Maldives and Zambia?
- 0.007, with Zambia ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Maldives and Zambia?
- 115 years are reported by both, from 1911 to 2025.
- How do Maldives and Zambia rank globally for respect for counterarguments score?
- Maldives ranks 86th and Zambia ranks 83rd of 175 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- V-Dem (2026) β processed by Our World in Data, published as Respect for Counterarguments Score. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
Central estimate of the extent to which political elites acknowledge and respect counterarguments when considering important policy changes.