Judgment and Measurement in Political Science

被引:47
作者
Schedler, Andreas [1 ]
机构
[1] CIDE, Mexico City, DF, Mexico
关键词
D O I
10.1017/S1537592711004889
中图分类号
D0 [政治学、政治理论];
学科分类号
0302 ; 030201 ;
摘要
Standard methodological advice in political science warns against the distortion of measurement decisions by judgmental elements. Judgment is subjective, common wisdom asserts, it produces opaque, biased, and unreliable data. This article, by contrast, argues that judgment is a critical intersubjective ingredient of political measurement that needs to be acknowledged and rationalized, rather than exorcised.
引用
收藏
页码:21 / 36
页数:16
相关论文
共 44 条
[1]   Measurement validity: A shared standard for qualitative and quantitative research [J].
Adcock, R ;
Collier, D .
AMERICAN POLITICAL SCIENCE REVIEW, 2001, 95 (03) :529-546
[2]   Fractionalization [J].
Alesina, A ;
Devleeschauwer, A ;
Easterly, W ;
Kurlat, S ;
Wacziarg, R .
JOURNAL OF ECONOMIC GROWTH, 2003, 8 (02) :155-194
[3]  
[Anonymous], 2011, NAT TRANS 2011
[4]  
[Anonymous], 1994, Designing Social Inquiry: Scientific Inference in Qualitative Research
[5]  
Banks ArthurS., 2008, Cross-National Time-Series Data Archive
[6]   Concept Formation in Political Science: An Anti-Naturalist Critique of Qualitative Methodology [J].
Bevir, Mark ;
Kedar, Asaf .
PERSPECTIVES ON POLITICS, 2008, 6 (03) :503-517
[7]  
Bevir Mark, 2008, OXFORD HDB POLITICAL
[8]   Subjective measures of liberal democracy [J].
Bollen, KA ;
Paxton, P .
COMPARATIVE POLITICAL STUDIES, 2000, 33 (01) :58-86
[9]  
Brady Henry., 2004, RETHINKING SOCIAL IN
[10]  
Carmines E.G., 2005, Encyclopedia of Social Measurement, V3