The Oxford Handbook of Political Methodology

By Janet M. Box-Steffensmeier, Henry E. Brady, David Collier. 2010

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Natural Language Processing

Citations in the corpus

Measurement and Fairness (2019, background): “A measurement model is a statistical model that links unobservable theoretical constructs, operationalized as latent variables, and data about the world [34].”
The maximum approximate composite marginal likelihood (MACML) estimation of multinomial probit-based unordered response choice models (2011, methodology): “…decision-maker in panel or repeated choice contexts (see Li et al., 2010), (c) spatial/social dependency-based error structure models that generate error dependencies across choice occasions of different decision-makers (see Franzese and Hays, 2008), or (d) some combinations of these model forms.”
On doing relevant and rigorous experiments: Review and recommendations (2018, methodology): “Some of our recommendations are similar to the ones already presented in manuals and reviews of experimental method both in OM (e.g., Katok, 2011) and other disciplines (e.g., Duflo et al., 2007; Gerber & Green, 2008; Hertwig & Ortmann, 2001).”
The Generalizability of Survey Experiments* (2015, background): “For instance, population samples facilitate the testing of heterogeneous treatment effects, particularly in cases concerns about the sample are a “near obsession” (also see Gerber and Green 2008, 358; Gerring 2012, 271; Iyengar 1991, 21).”
Redistricting and the Personal Vote: When Natural Experiments are Neither Natural nor Experiments (2009, unknown): “…been used by scholars in a wide variety of fields, including political participation (Brady and McNulty 2004; Huber and Arceneaux 2007; Krasno and Green 2008; Lassen 2005), elections and electoral competitiveness (Carman, Mitchell, and Johns 2008; Gordon and Huber 2007), political psychology…”
The Case for Selecting Cases That Are Deviant or Extreme on the Independent Variable (2016, background): “Other authors, including King et al. (1994) and (Fearon and Laitin 2008), justify their case selection advice as a way of avoiding specific threats such as selection or confirmation bias.”