« Come hear my talk next Tuesday |
| Sometimes you expose the holes »
Oh, Andrew Sullivan selected this as Chart of the Day a few weeks ago (link):
Too bad the content was good.
Posted on Oct 28, 2013 at 08:01 AM | Permalink
I'me not certain how they got their estimates, they reference a paper by Poole, but it isn't in the bibliography. What you get for using Word. Simon Jackman for voting intentions in the US government using data pooled over time uses a latent variable method, essentially item response theory (IRT), and I assume they use this or something that is effectively the same.
The problem with it, is that you need items spread across the range of difficulty, otherwise results can be dominated by a small number of items. In this case given that only 3 nations have voted in favour of the US action on Cuba this makes it a very difficult item. So getting it "correct", unless there are items of similar difficulty, would virtually define the value of the latent variable, which is what the right axis represents. Some sort of sensitivity analysis needs to be done without these unusual items. It is quite probable that they don't fit the IRT model anyway.
Oct 29, 2013 at 03:17 AM
This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.
The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.
As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.
Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.
(You can use HTML tags like <b> <i> and <ul> to style your text.)
(Name is required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)
Name is required to post a comment
Please enter a valid email address