1 / 9

Comparative Strategies for Transnational Analysis: A Case Study from the 1st European Conference on Comparative Electora

Explore a case study on comparing secondary aspects in electoral research, focusing on data quality, method choice, results analysis, and key lessons learned in a transnational context. Dr. Frédéric Falkenhagen presents insights from studying voters of ethno-regional parties in Western Europe. Learn about research modeling, state of authoritarianism studies, and challenges in indicator construction.Check out this informative study for valuable insights in electoral research analysis.

donovan-rojas
Download Presentation

Comparative Strategies for Transnational Analysis: A Case Study from the 1st European Conference on Comparative Electora

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Strategies for transnational comparison of secondary aspects: a case study 1st European Conference on Comparative Electoral Research – Sofia – Friday, 2nd December 2011 Dr. Frédéric Falkenhagen – Carl-von-Ossietzky University Oldenburg – frederic.falkenhagen@uni-oldenburg.de

  2. Overview • Research Case • State of authoritarianism research • Data quality and shape • Choosing a method of indicator construction • Results • Lessons from the experience

  3. Research Case I – Context of Research • Research on voters of ethno-regional parties in Western Europe • Quantitative comparison of voters of four parties in three countries • Secondary analysis of 16 post-electoral (or equivalent) surveys over the period 1991-2003

  4. Research Case II – Modelling • National data analysis through GDA and clustering • Comparison of national results • Socio-demographic and ideological models • Baseline models as invalidation devices • Fifth case as contrast case

  5. State of authoritarianism research • Historic research (Adorno et al. 1950) still universally acknowledged and referenced • Compatible theoretical outlooks • Empirical module in dire condition • Bound to initial context • Outdated in content and form • No coordinated development

  6. Data quality and shape • Minor place in questionnaires • Diverse items internationally • Diverse module size internationally • Moderately stable items nationally • Partial absence of single items or modules • Only national indicators can be built meaningfully • Comparison of national indicators

  7. Choosing a method of indicator construction • Factor analysis • Listwise exclusion cuts sample by two thirds • Imputation techniques introduce major artefact risks or demand to much to work out • Hierarchical scaling • Too few items • Very different module size • Specific Multiple Correspondence Analysis • Only relative positions • General indication of data structure

  8. Results of indicator construction • All three national samples close • Scree-test points to bi-dimensional descriptions • Second dimension measures Guttman effect • Irregular intervals (social control) • National differences in polarisation

  9. Lessons from the experience • Data and documentation knowledge is paramount • Common theoretical references essential • Several possible strategies depending on structure and use • Short modules and low data homogeneity favour geometrical data analysis • Do not overstretch results

More Related