Constarium
← Search

Data · dataset · 2010

Replication data for: The Search for Comparability: Response to Binder

Listed in Harvard Dataverse

Binder (n.d., Taking the measure of Congress: Reply to Chiou and Rothenberg.

Description

Political Analysis. Forthcoming) highlights areas of agreement and disagreement with our discussion of preference measurement and legislative gridlock.

We now both agree that W-NOMINATE scores—employed in Binder (1999, The dynamics of legislative gridlock. American Political Science Review 9:519–33) to measure key independent variables, including bicameral differences—should not be used when examining multichamber legislatures over time. We continue to disagree over whether Common Space scores or Binder's conference vote measure is superior.

Read the rest (1 more)

In this response, we show that, although several of the theoretical and statistical objections that Binder (n.d.) raises to our Common Space measure do not apply, they are all relevant for her conference vote analog. Additionally, we detail how, despite protests to the contrary, the conference vote measure is plagued by insufficient data. Finally, we demonstrate how new efforts to show that Binder's (1999) results continue to hold are not robust.

Links

Where it is published

Catalogue records · 1
Provenance · 1 source records, 6 field assertions
SourceKeyLast seenRaw
Harvard Dataversedoi:10.7910/DVN/1DLOE613 d agoJSON v1
FieldAssertionExtractorEvidence
created_datesource · Harvard Dataverseconnector:dataverse@1.0.0
descriptionsource · Harvard Dataverseconnector:dataverse@1.0.0/description
publication_datesource · Harvard Dataverseconnector:dataverse@1.0.0
titlesource · Harvard Dataverseconnector:dataverse@1.0.0/name
updated_datesource · Harvard Dataverseconnector:dataverse@1.0.0
version_labelsource · Harvard Dataverseconnector:dataverse@1.0.0