The Influence of Geospatial Factors on Democracy: Its Representation on Web Interface Design Rowena Li Bayside High School Library, 32-24 Corporal Kennedy Street, Bayside, NY 11361. E-mail: rowenali@yahoo.com Democracy is represented on web interface design (Li, 2010). Wittfogel’s (1957) Eastern autocracy states that 2 environmental dimensions, rainfall and sea border, influ- ence the origin of democracy. This study examined Wittfogel’s Eastern autocracy theory through statistical analysis of average annual precipitation, land bound- aries, latitudes, and annual temperature of 196 countries and territories with their freedom levels defined by Freedom House, to find out the correlations between these geospatial factors and democracy. In addition, this study extended its investigation to web interface design by examining democracy represented on college/ university websites in correlations with these geospatial factors. A total of 130 college/university websites selected from 65 countries were coded and examined systematically in linear and multiple regression analy- ses. This study concluded that democracy correlates positively with annual precipitation and latitude, but negatively with land boundaries and annual tempera- ture. Furthermore, this study indicated that these 4 geospatial variables associate with democracy repre- sented on web interface design, although the associa- tions are not statistically significant. This study also suggested that it is more accurate to predict democracy if the 4 geospatial factors are considered together as dependent variables. By examining Wittfogel’s theory of hydraulic civilization on web interface design, this study not only extended its sociological perspective to the information science arena, but also provided a better understanding of the functionality of the Internet in information dissemination and its cultural and sociologi- cal aspects. Introduction The examination of the origin of the state in the past century has led to an inquiry of the origin of autocracy in hydraulic civilizations. Why did ancient autocratic empires originate in the East, such as Mesopotamia, while the citizens in Western Europe experienced more equal privi- leges? Has natural environment influenced man’s response to his social structure—the formation of the state? And even further, does democracy correlate with some specific environmental conditions? Among the few theorists who examined the rise of ancient autocratic empires, Wittfogel (1955, 1957) offered a general view of environmental influ- ences on the rise of oriental autocracy. He indicated that the managerial needs for irrigation in an arid area lead to the development of an organized hydraulic society, where the elites build their own political and social structures. As a result, centralized despotism appears. Subsequently, numerous authors have suggested the same. The most influ- ential studies (Midlarsky, 1999; Midlarsky & Midlarsky, 1997) examined four ancient civilizations, Sumer, Mesoamerica, Crete, and China, using rainfall and sea borders as two environmental variables. Midlarsky found that these two environmental variables, together with two other societal variables—land inequality and economic development—correlate with each civilization’s political rights index. In addition to environmental and societal variables, cul- tural beliefs and values remarkably shape the political and economic development of a society as well, including its political democratization. In a society, people who value traditional family ties and social conformity are more likely to respect the authorities. On the other hand, people who are in favor of rational and legal values are more inclined to emphasize individualistic achievement and tolerate defer- ence. Societies with a tradition of emphasizing political and economic security and stability show less interpersonal trust and are in favor of an authoritarian government, while soci- eties with a culture of stressing self-expression values are more tolerant of new ideas and are more likely to sustain democracy (Inglehart, 2000). Hofstede (2001), in establish- ing systematic frameworks to identify and evaluate cultural differences, proposed power distance, a culture variable, to measure a mental relationship between the subordinator and the superior. In a high power distance culture, the superior Received November 24, 2012; revised February 27, 2013; accepted February 27, 2013 © 2013 ASIS&T • Published online 8 November 2013 in Wiley Online Library (wileyonlinelibrary.com). DOI: 10.1002/asi.22964 JOURNAL OF THE ASSOCIATION FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, 65(2):313–333, 2014