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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Daniel Kaufmann & Aart Kraay, 2008. "Governance Indicators: Where Are We, Where Should We Be Going?," The World Bank Research Observer, World Bank, vol. 23(1), pages 1-30, January.
    2. Nancy Qian & David Yanagizawa, 2009. "The Strategic Determinants of U.S. Human Rights Reporting: Evidence from The Cold War," Journal of the European Economic Association, MIT Press, vol. 7(2-3), pages 446-457, 04-05.
    3. Adcock, Robert & Collier, David, 2001. "Measurement Validity: A Shared Standard for Qualitative and Quantitative Research," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 95(3), pages 529-546, September.
    4. Pemstein, Daniel & Meserve, Stephen A. & Melton, James, 2010. "Democratic Compromise: A Latent Variable Analysis of Ten Measures of Regime Type," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 18(4), pages 426-449.
    5. Przeworski,Adam & Alvarez,Michael E. & Cheibub,Jose Antonio & Limongi,Fernando, 2000. "Democracy and Development," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521793797, January.
    6. Herrera, Yoshiko M. & Kapur, Devesh, 2007. "Improving Data Quality: Actors, Incentives, and Capabilities," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 15(4), pages 365-386.
    7. Przeworski,Adam & Alvarez,Michael E. & Cheibub,Jose Antonio & Limongi,Fernando, 2000. "Democracy and Development," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521790321, January.
    8. Joe Foweraker & Roman Krznaric, 2000. "Measuring Liberal Democratic Performance: an Empirical and Conceptual Critique," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 48(4), pages 759-787, September.
    9. repec:dau:papers:123456789/4352 is not listed on IDEAS
    10. Razafindrakoto, Mireille & Roubaud, François, 2010. "Are International Databases on Corruption Reliable? A Comparison of Expert Opinion Surveys and Household Surveys in Sub-Saharan Africa," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 38(8), pages 1057-1069, August.
    11. Sandra Sequeira, 2012. "Chapter 6 Advances in Measuring Corruption in the Field," Research in Experimental Economics, in: New Advances in Experimental Research on Corruption, pages 145-175, Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
    12. José Cheibub & Jennifer Gandhi & James Vreeland, 2010. "Democracy and dictatorship revisited," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 143(1), pages 67-101, April.
    13. Nils B. Weidmann, 2016. "A Closer Look at Reporting Bias in Conflict Event Data," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 60(1), pages 206-218, January.
    14. Mayne, Quinton & Geissel, Brigitte, 2016. "Putting the Demos Back Into the Concept of Democratic Quality," Scholarly Articles 25286593, Harvard Kennedy School of Government.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Heiko Giebler & Saskia P. Ruth & Dag Tanneberg, 2018. "Why Choice Matters: Revisiting and Comparing Measures of Democracy," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 6(1), pages 1-10.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. 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.
    2. Todd Landman, 2018. "Democracy and Human Rights: Concepts, Measures, and Relationships," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 6(1), pages 48-59.
    3. Alberto Batinti & Joan Costa‐Font & Timothy J. Hatton, 2022. "Voting Up? The Effects of Democracy and Franchise Extension on Human Stature," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 89(353), pages 161-190, January.
    4. Vanessa A Boese, 2019. "How (not) to measure democracy," International Area Studies Review, Center for International Area Studies, Hankuk University of Foreign Studies, vol. 22(2), pages 95-127, June.
    5. Giebler, Heiko & Ruth, Saskia P. & Tanneberg, Dag, 2018. "Why Choice Matters: Revisiting and Comparing Measures of Democracy," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 6(1), pages 1-10.
    6. Heiko Giebler & Saskia P. Ruth & Dag Tanneberg, 2018. "Why Choice Matters: Revisiting and Comparing Measures of Democracy," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 6(1), pages 1-10.
    7. Espen Geelmuyden Rød & Carl Henrik Knutsen & Håvard Hegre, 2020. "The determinants of democracy: a sensitivity analysis," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 185(1), pages 87-111, October.
    8. Sajad Rahimian, 2021. "The Determinants of Democracy Revisited: An Instrumental Variable Bayesian Model Averaging Approach," Papers 2103.04255, arXiv.org.
    9. Jennifer Raymond Dresden, 2017. "From combatants to candidates: Electoral competition and the legacy of armed conflict," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 34(3), pages 240-263, May.
    10. Daron Acemoglu & Suresh Naidu & Pascual Restrepo & James A. Robinson, 2019. "Democracy Does Cause Growth," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 127(1), pages 47-100.
    11. Lewis Davis & Claudia R. Williamson, 2018. "Open Borders for Business? Causes and Consequences of the Regulation of Foreign Entry," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 85(2), pages 508-536, October.
    12. Axel Dreher & Matthew Gould & Matthew Rablen & James Vreeland, 2014. "The determinants of election to the United Nations Security Council," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 158(1), pages 51-83, January.
    13. Yue, Jiahua & Zhou, Shangsi, 2018. "Democracy’s comparative advantage: Evidence from aggregated trade data, 1962–2010," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 27-40.
    14. Cervellati, Matteo & Fortunato, Piergiuseppe & Sunde, Uwe, 2011. "Democratization and Civil Liberties: The Role of Violence During the Transition," IZA Discussion Papers 5555, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    15. Gabriel Leon, 2014. "Loyalty for sale? Military spending and coups d’etat," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 159(3), pages 363-383, June.
    16. Easterly, William & Williamson, Claudia R., 2011. "Rhetoric versus Reality: The Best and Worst of Aid Agency Practices," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 39(11), pages 1930-1949.
    17. Islam, Muhammed N., 2015. "Economic growth, repression, and state expenditure in non-democratic regimes," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 68-85.
    18. von Soest, Christian & Wahman, Michael, 2013. "Sanctions and Democratization in the Post-Cold War Era," GIGA Working Papers 212, GIGA German Institute of Global and Area Studies.
    19. Ivar Kolstad & Arne Wiig, 2014. "Diversification and democracy," CMI Working Papers 9, CMI (Chr. Michelsen Institute), Bergen, Norway.
    20. Mogens Justesen & Peter Kurrild-Klitgaard, 2013. "Institutional interactions and economic growth: the joint effects of property rights, veto players and democratic capital," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 157(3), pages 449-474, December.

    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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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.