Author:
Bateman David A.,Lapinski John
Abstract
This article aims to persuade historically oriented political scientists that ideal point techniques such as DW-NOMINATE can illuminate much about politics and lawmaking and be very useful to better understanding some of the key questions put forward by American political development (APD) scholars. We believe that there are many lines of inquiry of interest to APD scholars where ideal point measure could be useful, but which have been effectively foreclosed because of the assumptions undergirding DW-NOMINATE. In particular, we focus on three issues as particularly important: (1) the assumption of linear change; (2) the collapsing of distinct policy issue areas into a single “ideology” score; and (3) an agnosticism toward policy development, institutional context, and historical periodization. We go over these issues in detail and propose that many of these concerns can be addressed by taking seriously the proposition that policy substance, historical and political context, and the temporal dimension of political processes be integrated into the core of our measures and analyses. We also discuss a set of techniques for addressing these issues in order to answer specific questions of broad interest to both APD scholars and other Americanists.
Publisher
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Subject
Sociology and Political Science,History
Reference48 articles.
1. Procedural Contexts, Party Strategy, and Conditional Party Voting in the U.S. House of Representatives, 1971–2000
2. The Structure of Utility in Spatial Models of Voting,;Carroll;American Journal of Political Science,2013
3. Public Opinion, Organized Labor, and the Limits of New Deal Liberalism, 1936–1945,;Caughy;Studies in American Political Development,2011
4. Party Discipline and Measures of Partisanship
5. Agreeing to Disagree: Agenda Content and Senate Partisanship, 1981-2004
Cited by
16 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献