@article{ mcdonald_getting_????,
  title = {Getting it (approximately) right (and center and left!): reliability and uncertainty estimates for the comparative manifesto data},
  issn = {0261-3794},
  shorttitle = {Getting it (approximately) right (and center and left!)},
  url = {http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0261379414000572},
  doi = {10.1016/j.electstud.2014.04.017},
  abstract = {The extensive estimates of party policy preferences produced by the CMP (Comparative Manifesto Project, now MARPOR) have proved robust and valid over a wide variety of research applications. But all estimates carry some error. We demonstrate that one of the two existing assessments of non-systematic error in the CMP data strongly overstates their reliability while the other understates it, leaving much potential for mis-estimation. We develop a new method which extends classical test theory and directly estimates overall data reliability; reliabilities and standard errors of measurement for each party system; and standard errors of measurement for each data-point. These should facilitate use of the CMP policy scores which are usually the only ones available for extended party and policy research.},
  urldate = {2014-05-19TZ},
  journal = {Electoral Studies},
  author = {McDonald, Michael D. and Budge, Ian}
}

{"_id":"vFvJcpSzxkhAmG4jf","authorIDs":[],"author_short":["McDonald, M.<nbsp>D.","Budge, I."],"bibbaseid":"mcdonald-budge-gettingitapproximatelyrightandcenterandleftreliabilityanduncertaintyestimatesforthecomparativemanifestodata","bibdata":{"abstract":"The extensive estimates of party policy preferences produced by the CMP (Comparative Manifesto Project, now MARPOR) have proved robust and valid over a wide variety of research applications. But all estimates carry some error. We demonstrate that one of the two existing assessments of non-systematic error in the CMP data strongly overstates their reliability while the other understates it, leaving much potential for mis-estimation. We develop a new method which extends classical test theory and directly estimates overall data reliability; reliabilities and standard errors of measurement for each party system; and standard errors of measurement for each data-point. These should facilitate use of the CMP policy scores which are usually the only ones available for extended party and policy research.","author":["McDonald, Michael D.","Budge, Ian"],"author_short":["McDonald, M.<nbsp>D.","Budge, I."],"bibtex":"@article{ mcdonald_getting_????,\n title = {Getting it (approximately) right (and center and left!): reliability and uncertainty estimates for the comparative manifesto data},\n issn = {0261-3794},\n shorttitle = {Getting it (approximately) right (and center and left!)},\n url = {http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0261379414000572},\n doi = {10.1016/j.electstud.2014.04.017},\n abstract = {The extensive estimates of party policy preferences produced by the CMP (Comparative Manifesto Project, now MARPOR) have proved robust and valid over a wide variety of research applications. But all estimates carry some error. We demonstrate that one of the two existing assessments of non-systematic error in the CMP data strongly overstates their reliability while the other understates it, leaving much potential for mis-estimation. We develop a new method which extends classical test theory and directly estimates overall data reliability; reliabilities and standard errors of measurement for each party system; and standard errors of measurement for each data-point. These should facilitate use of the CMP policy scores which are usually the only ones available for extended party and policy research.},\n urldate = {2014-05-19TZ},\n journal = {Electoral Studies},\n author = {McDonald, Michael D. and Budge, Ian}\n}","bibtype":"article","doi":"10.1016/j.electstud.2014.04.017","id":"mcdonald_getting_????","issn":"0261-3794","journal":"Electoral Studies","key":"mcdonald_getting_????","shorttitle":"Getting it (approximately) right (and center and left!)","title":"Getting it (approximately) right (and center and left!): reliability and uncertainty estimates for the comparative manifesto data","type":"article","url":"http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0261379414000572","urldate":"2014-05-19TZ","bibbaseid":"mcdonald-budge-gettingitapproximatelyrightandcenterandleftreliabilityanduncertaintyestimatesforthecomparativemanifestodata","role":"author","urls":{"Paper":"http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0261379414000572"},"downloads":0},"bibtype":"article","biburl":"http://bibbase.org/zotero/nicmer","creationDate":"2015-04-01T06:12:30.334Z","downloads":0,"keywords":[],"search_terms":["getting","approximately","right","center","left","reliability","uncertainty","estimates","comparative","manifesto","data","mcdonald","budge"],"title":"Getting it (approximately) right (and center and left!): reliability and uncertainty estimates for the comparative manifesto data","year":null,"dataSources":["P7bHLEfmPfwtQBBTM"]}