IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cog/poango/v6y2018i1p105-116.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Different Types of Data and the Validity of Democracy Measures

Author

Listed:
  • Svend-Erik Skaaning

    (Department of Political Science, Aarhus University, Denmark)

Abstract

Different measures of democracy rely on different types of data. Some exclusively rely on observational data, others rely on judgement-based data in the form of in-house coded indicators or expert surveys. A third set of democracy measures combines information from indicators based on different types of data, some of them also data from representative surveys of the mass public. This article discusses the advantages and disadvantages of these different types of data for the measurement of electoral and liberal democracy. The discussion is based on the premise that the main priorities must be to establish a high degree of concept-measure consistency, i.e. indicators capture relevant aspects of the core concept of interest in a precise and unbiased manner, and to provide high coverage. The basic argument of the article is that no type of data is superior to others in all respects. The article draws on examples from extant datasets to illustrate the tradeoffs and it offers suggestions about how to reduce some of the potential drawbacks.

Suggested Citation

  • Svend-Erik Skaaning, 2018. "Different Types of Data and the Validity of Democracy Measures," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 6(1), pages 105-116.
    • Handle: RePEc:cog:poango:v6:y:2018:i:1:p:105-116
    DOI: 10.17645/pag.v6i1.1183
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cogitatiopress.com/politicsandgovernance/article/view/1183
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.17645/pag.v6i1.1183?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cog:poango:v6:y:2018:i:1:p:105-116. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: António Vieira or IT Department (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cogitatiopress.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.