IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/intorg/v39y1985i01p189-206_00.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Measurement validation: lessons from the use and misuse of UN General Assembly roll-call votes

Author

Listed:
  • Tomlin, Brian W.

Abstract

An oft-claimed advantage of scientific studies of international politics is the intersubjectivity of such inquiries. Although the ultimate promise of scientific knowledge is the understanding it imparts to patterns of association among classes of events, much contemporary research falls considerably short of this goal. As a result, the principal, immediate value of such research lies in its adherence to scientific practices that ensure that findings are not wholly dependent on the methods of measurement and analysis adopted by a particular researcher. More than a decade ago James Caporaso demonstrated the utility of measurement validation as a specific application of the general scientific mandate that inquiry be intersubjective. 1 Yet despite widespread positive reaction to Caporaso's examination of alternative measures of the concept “integration,” his study stands out as a rare example of the type of systematic investigation of measurement validity that must be undertaken in order to fulfill this scientific mandate. 2

Suggested Citation

  • Tomlin, Brian W., 1985. "Measurement validation: lessons from the use and misuse of UN General Assembly roll-call votes," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 39(1), pages 189-206, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:intorg:v:39:y:1985:i:01:p:189-206_00
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0020818300004902/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:cup:intorg:v:39:y:1985:i:01:p:189-206_00. 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: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/ino .

    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.