Here is a roundup of replies to a question I posted on Twitter regarding descriptive quantitative research in political science:
What’s your favorite example of a descriptive quantitative paper in political science—not trying to estimate a causal effect or fit a model, but rather use good measurement to challenge conventional wisdom about state of the world?
— Cyrus Samii (@cdsamii) May 11, 2018
Outside political science, I can think of a number of examples, although I was interested in political examples per se, and particularly ones that are published as papers:
i like this one quite a bit:https://t.co/9avMy2y6kB
— Josh McCrain (@joshmccrain) May 11, 2018
I can think of many in econ too—eg, “Economic Lives of the Poor”, “Financial Diaries”, or Bloom/Van Reenan management stuff. I am specifically wondering about poli sci though.
— Cyrus Samii (@cdsamii) May 11, 2018
i did a political science version of the AER lobbying papers and is definitely descriptive:https://t.co/GUdFh8cQR8
— Josh McCrain (@joshmccrain) May 11, 2018
Hands down: Blattman, C., & Miguel, E. (2010). Civil war. Journal of Economic literature, 48(1), 3-57.
— Mark Shadden (@MarkShadden1) May 11, 2018
In economics, I would say the classic "Law and Finance". In poli sci, definitely Wand et al. (2001) on butterfly ballots (is this a descriptive paper?)
— Ye Wang (@yezhehuzhi) May 11, 2018
One thing that distinguishes poli sci from, say, econ is that poli sci has lots of books, many of which contain important descriptive work, as in this:
No a paper, but I think the descriptive sections of Unequal Democracy by Bartels are amazing.
— Tiago Ventura (@_Tiagoventura) May 11, 2018
Nonetheless, I was mostly interested in work published in paper form.
An important class of measurement contributions in poli sci include dimension reduction, scaling, and latent variable estimation methods. This includes things like ideal point estimation as well as analyses of text:
- Example 1:
Wouldn’t a lot of the text as data stuff fit here?
— Claire Adida (@ClaireAdida) May 11, 2018
Yes for sure. Do you have a favorite?
— Cyrus Samii (@cdsamii) May 11, 2018
clearly, anything written by @mollyeroberts.
— Claire Adida (@ClaireAdida) May 11, 2018
King, Pan, Roberts (2013) on Chinese censorship. There are causal interpretations in there, but it's mostly just a beautiful descriptive paper.
— Daniel de Kadt (@dandekadt) May 11, 2018
- Example 2:
Poole and Rosenthal (1985)
— Ryan D. Enos (@RyanDEnos) May 11, 2018
- Example 3:
"Democracy as a Latent Variable" by Treier and @SimonJackman is a very nice (dare I say 'important'?) piece in this area https://t.co/aftw9uolb1
— Arthur Spirling (@arthur_spirling) May 11, 2018
- Example 4:
Farris 2014 in the APSR
— Tore Wig (@torewig) May 11, 2018
Fariss (2014) https://t.co/R48tzm6OW4
— Yonatan Lupu (@yonatanlupu) May 11, 2018
(Chris’s last name is spelled Fariss, by the way.)
Poli sci scholars have also done a lot to elaborate small area estimation techniques and use them in analyzing survey data, as with the “MRP” papers, e.g.:
public opinion papers using MRP, especially Broockman and Skovron https://t.co/Hyok7uJpDy
— Alexander Sahn (@sahnicboom) May 11, 2018
Taxonomy, that is, organizing cases on the basis of conceptual categories, is another class of measurement-related work:
This is a nice example of simple classification. It's straightforward and improves on other classifications. We don't do too much taxonomy these days. https://t.co/fXQcSo9Myc
— Peter Loewen (@PeejLoewen) May 11, 2018
Sometimes descriptive work can indirectly inform causal questions:
Ansolabehere & Snyder paper showing overtime trends in inc. adv. for all statewide offices are identical to those for Congress. Purely descriptive, but suggests it's unlikely change in congressional inc. adv. is due to gerrymandering since the other offices have fixed districts.
— Ethan BdM (@ethanbdm) May 11, 2018
What I was most interested in were creative contributions that don’t apply especially new statistical methods, but are the result of shoe-leather effort that allows us to view important dynamics more clearly. Examples:
Gelman/Margalit's penumbras paper has considerable amounts of interesting descriptive stats. Not exactly challenging conv. wisdom, but has interesting implications. https://t.co/Y0tsdvaBrs.
— Michael Aklin (@MichaelAklin) May 11, 2018
Converse 64
— Yphtach Lelkes (@ylelkes) May 11, 2018
“Why is there so little money in politics?” is another great example
— Andy Hall (@andrewbhall) May 11, 2018
McDonald, M.P. and Popkin, S.L., 2001. The myth of the vanishing voter. American Political Science Review, 95(4), pp.963-974. @ElectProject
— Eric D. Lawrence (@eric_d_lawrence) May 11, 2018
I’d suggest “the rational public” and other work on ‘mood’ that demonstrates (not causally) that collective public opinion seems to be thermostatic, eg wlezien 1995
— Tom O'Grady (@DrTomD_OG) May 11, 2018
Not published yet but https://t.co/YRCcAItVcT
— Kevin Munger (@kmmunger) May 11, 2018
Here’s a “hard copy” of this post (which I will update again after all edits are in), for archival sake, in anticipation of potential Twitter link instability: [PDF]