How and why party position estimates from manifestos, expert, and party elite surveys diverge: A comparative analysis of the ‘left–right’ and the ‘European integration’ dimensions
Author(s) -
Alejandro Ecker,
Marcelo Jenny,
Wolfgang C. Müller,
Katrin Praprotnik
Publication year - 2021
Publication title -
party politics
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.895
H-Index - 73
eISSN - 1460-3683
pISSN - 1354-0688
DOI - 10.1177/1354068821990298
Subject(s) - manifesto , elite , position (finance) , survey data collection , congruence (geometry) , political science , sociology , positive economics , law , social psychology , economics , psychology , statistics , politics , finance , mathematics
This paper examines the validity of three approaches to estimate party positions on the general left-right and EU dimensions. We newly introduce party elite data from the comprehensive IntUne survey and cross-validate it with existing expert survey and manifesto data. The general left-right estimates generated by elites and experts show a higher congruence than those derived from party manifestos; neither measure clearly materializes as more valid regarding EU positions. We identify which factors explain diverging estimates. For instance, disagreement among experts has greater impact than their mere number. The substantial centrist bias of the manifesto estimates persists even when alternative documents are used to substitute manifestos. Low response rates among elites have no systematic detrimental effect on the validity of party position estimates.
Accelerating Research
Robert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom
Address
John Eccles HouseRobert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom