IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/qualqt/v47y2013i3p1687-1701.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How similar are they? rethinking electoral congruence

Author

Listed:
  • Jason Wittenberg

Abstract

Electoral continuity and discontinuity have been a staple of voting research for decades. Most researchers have employed Pearson’s r as a measure of congruence between two electoral outcomes across a set of geographic units. This paper argues that that practice should be abandoned. The correlation coefficient is a measure of linearity, not similarity, and is almost always the wrong measure. The paper recommends other quantities that better accord with what researchers usually mean by electoral persistence. Replications of prior studies in American and comparative politics demonstrate that the consequences of using r when it is inappropriate can be stark. In some cases what we think are continuities are actually discontinuities. Copyright Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2013

Suggested Citation

  • Jason Wittenberg, 2013. "How similar are they? rethinking electoral congruence," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 47(3), pages 1687-1701, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:qualqt:v:47:y:2013:i:3:p:1687-1701
    DOI: 10.1007/s11135-011-9620-0
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s11135-011-9620-0
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11135-011-9620-0?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Josep L. Carrasco & Lluís Jover, 2003. "Estimating the Generalized Concordance Correlation Coefficient through Variance Components," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 59(4), pages 849-858, December.
    2. Wand, Jonathan N. & Shotts, Kenneth W. & Sekhon, Jasjeet S. & Mebane, Walter R. & Herron, Michael C. & Brady, Henry E., 2001. "The Butterfly Did It: The Aberrant Vote for Buchanan in Palm Beach County, Florida," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 95(4), pages 793-810, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Helenowski Irene B & Vonesh Edward F & Demirtas Hakan & Rademaker Alfred W & Ananthanarayanan Vijayalakshmi & Gann Peter H & Jovanovic Borko D, 2011. "Defining Reproducibility Statistics as a Function of the Spatial Covariance Structures in Biomarker Studies," The International Journal of Biostatistics, De Gruyter, vol. 7(1), pages 1-21, January.
    2. Balakrishnan, Narayanaswamy & Ristić, Miroslav M., 2016. "Multivariate families of gamma-generated distributions with finite or infinite support above or below the diagonal," Journal of Multivariate Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 143(C), pages 194-207.
    3. Fukumoto, Kentaro & Horiuchi, Yusaku, 2011. "Making Outsiders' Votes Count: Detecting Electoral Fraud through a Natural Experiment," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 105(3), pages 586-603, August.
    4. Geòrgia Escaramís & Josep L. Carrasco & Carlos Ascaso, 2008. "Detection of Significant Disease Risks Using a Spatial Conditional Autoregressive Model," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 64(4), pages 1043-1053, December.
    5. Josep L. Carrasco, 2010. "A Generalized Concordance Correlation Coefficient Based on the Variance Components Generalized Linear Mixed Models for Overdispersed Count Data," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 66(3), pages 897-904, September.
    6. Michael Munger, 2005. "Nineteenth-century voting procedures in a twenty-first century world," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 124(1), pages 115-133, July.
    7. Tsai, Miao-Yu, 2015. "Comparison of concordance correlation coefficient via variance components, generalized estimating equations and weighted approaches with model selection," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 47-58.
    8. Cervellati, Matteo & Gulino, Giorgio & Roberti, Paolo, 2022. "Random Power to Parties and Policies in Coalition Governments," CEPR Discussion Papers 14906, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    9. Erkan Cer, 2019. "The Instruction of Writing Strategies: The Effect of the Metacognitive Strategy on the Writing Skills of Pupils in Secondary Education," SAGE Open, , vol. 9(2), pages 21582440198, April.
    10. Matteo Cervellati & Giorgio Gulino & Paolo Roberti, 2024. "Random Votes to Parties and Policies in Coalition Governments," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 92(5), pages 1553-1588, September.
    11. Chen, Chia-Cheng & Barnhart, Huiman X., 2008. "Comparison of ICC and CCC for assessing agreement for data without and with replications," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 53(2), pages 554-564, December.
    12. Antenangeli Leonardo & Cantú Francisco, 2019. "Right on Time: An Electoral Audit for the Publication of Vote Results," Statistics, Politics and Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 10(2), pages 137-186, December.
    13. Tsai, Miao-Yu & Lin, Chao-Chun, 2018. "Concordance correlation coefficients estimated by variance components for longitudinal normal and Poisson data," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 57-70.
    14. Walter R. Mebane & Jasjeet S. Sekhon, 2004. "Robust Estimation and Outlier Detection for Overdispersed Multinomial Models of Count Data," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 48(2), pages 392-411, April.
    15. Scott Basinger & Damon Cann & Michael Ensley, 2012. "Voter response to congressional campaigns: new techniques for analyzing aggregate electoral behavior," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 150(3), pages 771-792, March.

    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:spr:qualqt:v:47:y:2013:i:3:p:1687-1701. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.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.