The use of judgmental data in roll call analysis

Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Authors
Laurance, Edward J.
Advisors
Second Readers
Subjects
Date of Issue
1978-06
Date
1978-06
Publisher
Monterey, California. Naval Postgraduate School
Language
Abstract
Despite the fact that the roll call voting patterns of legislators are being used more frequently in the political arena, the statistical methods employed by political scientists for analyzing roll calls (e.g., Guttman scaling, factor analysis) are not being used. The main reason is the failure to incorporate in a systematic manner the subjective estimates of the political organizations and individuals who muse use the output of such analyses. This paper presents two methods, paired comparison and constant sum, which use judgmental data in assessing roll calls. Using a set of seven defense policy roll calls from the 1976 US Senate, the methods are described and compared using two sets of judges.
Type
Technical Report
Description
Despite the fact that the roll call voting patterns of legislators are being used more frequently in the political arena, the statistical methods employed by political scientists for analyzing roll calls (e.g., Guttman scaling, factor analysis) are not being used. The main reason is the failure to incorporate in a systematic manner the subjective estimates of the political organizations and individuals who must use the output of such analyses. This paper presents two methods, paired comparison and constant sum, which use judgmental data in assessing roll calls. Using a set of seven defense policy roll calls from the 1976 US Senate, the methods are described and compared using two sets of judges
Series/Report No
Department
Organization
Identifiers
NPS Report Number
NPS56-79-003
Sponsors
Prepared for: Chief of Naval Research, Arlington, VA
Funding
funds provided by the Chief of Naval Research
Format
28 p. ; 28 cm.
Citation
Distribution Statement
Rights
This publication is a work of the U.S. Government as defined in Title 17, United States Code, Section 101. Copyright protection is not available for this work in the United States.
Collections