Search

Comparisons of individuals based on their selections from an ordinal scale traditionally assume that all respondents interpret subjective scale categories in exactly the same way. Anchoring vignettes have been proposed as a method to replace this homogeneity assumption with individual-specific data about how each respondent uses the ordinal scale. However, improving interpersonal comparisons with anchoring vignettes also requires a new set of assumptions. In this article, I derive the assumptions needed to make credible nonparametric comparisons using anchoring vignettes, and propose a new nonparametric scale that does not assume homogeneity among respondents. I also provide methods for evaluating empirically whether a set of anchoring objects can produce credible nonparametric interpersonal comparisons. Two empirical studies illustrate the importance of accounting for differences in the use of ordinal scales by showing how our inferences about interpersonal comparisons may change as a function of the assumptions we accept. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Following allegations that Accuvote optical scan machines used in New Hampshire during the 2004 presidential election produced unusually low vote totals for Democratic candidate John Kerry, third party candidate Ralph Nader requested and funded a hand recount of ballots cast in eleven New Hampshire precincts. Using statistical methods well-suited for identifying election irregularities, we find no evidence of systematic biases among New Hampshire''s Accuvote machines. Nor do we find evidence of other technology-related tabulation problems in the state. Our findings explain why the New Hampshire presidential recount did not substantiate alleged Accuvote discrepancies, and indeed it recovered more votes for George W. Bush than it did for Kerry. More generally, our analysis demonstrates methods that can help avoid false allegations about vote fraud while enabling concerned citizens, election administrators, and researchers to find and remedy real election irregularities. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Investigates whether the butterfly ballot caused several thousand Al Gore supporters to vote mistakenly for Pat Buchanan in Palm beach County, Florida. Evidence of problems with ballots, voting machines or election administration; Source of the Buchanan's support in Palm Beach County; Effect of the ballot format leading to systematic biased voting errors.

Studies of national identity distinguish between ethnic and civic nations and have sought to identify these alternative conceptions of national identity in public opinion. The standard measurement technique is to assess the normative content of American national identity by asking survey respondents to rate the importance of particular traits for making someone a 'true' American. We argue that such measures are problematic, chiefly because of the impact of nonrandom measurement error. We explore the influence of using ranking measures instead of ratings, using a survey experiment conducted on a nationally representative sample of Americans in 2008. The ranking method is superior for distinguishing between ethnic and civic conceptions of nationhood and, therefore, for predicting preferences on issues such as immigration policy. We develop a new statistical method that effectively 'converts' ratings into scores that approximate rankings, resulting in the creation of more valid measures of both ethnic and civic national identities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]