IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/pscirm/v4y2016i01p241-247_00.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Beyond Valence: Estimating Models of Party Choice Without Resort to Ecological Fallacy or Unfounded Causal Assumptions. A Reply to Whiteley et al.

Author

Listed:
  • Evans, Geoffrey
  • Chzhen, Kat

Abstract

Whiteley et al. criticize our re-analysis of the valence model of party choice. In reply, we argue that they are mistaken with regard to their understanding of some of the claims made in our paper and, in one instance, the variables included in the analysis. We also point to flaws in their interpretation of the distinction between weak and contemporaneous endogeneity and the assumptions of their vector error correction model. Their argument privileging aggregate analysis introduces predictable inferential problems and also, it might be suggested, potentially casts doubt on their own research, which uses individual-level analysis to make the case for the valence model. For these reasons, we see no reason to moderate the negative implications of our analysis for the validity of the model.

Suggested Citation

  • Evans, Geoffrey & Chzhen, Kat, 2016. "Beyond Valence: Estimating Models of Party Choice Without Resort to Ecological Fallacy or Unfounded Causal Assumptions. A Reply to Whiteley et al.," Political Science Research and Methods, Cambridge University Press, vol. 4(1), pages 241-247, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:pscirm:v:4:y:2016:i:01:p:241-247_00
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S204984701500031X/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:pscirm:v:4:y:2016:i:01:p:241-247_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/ram .

    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.