IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/somere/v54y2025i2p706-738.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comparing Methods for Estimating Demographics in Racially Polarized Voting Analyses

Author

Listed:
  • Ari Decter-Frain
  • Pratik Sachdeva
  • Loren Collingwood
  • Hikari Murayama
  • Juandalyn Burke
  • Matt Barreto
  • Scott Henderson
  • Spencer Wood
  • Joshua Zingher

Abstract

We consider the cascading effects of researcher decisions throughout the process of quantifying racially polarized voting (RPV). We contrast three methods of estimating precinct racial composition, Bayesian Improved Surname Geocoding (BISG), fully Bayesian BISG, and Citizen Voting Age Population (CVAP), and two algorithms for performing ecological inference (EI), King’s EI and EI:RxC using eiCompare. Using data from two different elections we identify circumstances in which different combinations of methods produce divergent results, comparing against ground-truth data where available. We first find that BISG outperforms CVAP at estimating racial composition, though fully Bayesian BISG does not yield further improvements. Next, in a statewide election, we find that all combinations of methods yield similarly reliable estimates of RPV. However, county-level analyses and results from a non-partisan school board election reveal that BISG and CVAP produce divergent estimates of Black preferences in elections with low turnout and few precincts. Our results suggest that methodological choices can meaningfully alter conclusions about RPV, particularly in smaller, low-turnout elections.

Suggested Citation

  • Ari Decter-Frain & Pratik Sachdeva & Loren Collingwood & Hikari Murayama & Juandalyn Burke & Matt Barreto & Scott Henderson & Spencer Wood & Joshua Zingher, 2025. "Comparing Methods for Estimating Demographics in Racially Polarized Voting Analyses," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 54(2), pages 706-738, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:somere:v:54:y:2025:i:2:p:706-738
    DOI: 10.1177/00491241231192383
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/00491241231192383
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/00491241231192383?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:sae:somere:v:54:y:2025:i:2:p:706-738. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.