A Reply to Zax's (2002) Critique of Grofman and Migalski (1988)

Bernard Grofman and Matt A. Barreto
Additional contact information
Bernard Grofman: University of California, Irvine, bgrofman@uci.edu
Matt A. Barreto: University of Washington

Sociological Methods & Research, 2009, vol. 37, issue 4, 599-617

Abstract: The authors reply to Zax's critique of the double-equation method for ecological regression and of the specific extension to it proposed by Grofman and Migalski. Although Zax does correct two minor errors in Grofman and Migalski's statement of the double-equation approach, neither of those errors affected the final calculations reported in their article. Furthermore, nothing Zax reports affects their fundamental conclusion that double-equation methods can be superior to single-equation techniques if there is substantial error in the measurement of the independent variable. In particular, by analyzing an election for which, from exit polls, the ``true'' parameters of Hispanic and non-Hispanic levels of political cohesion are known, the authors show that double-equation ecological regression estimates derived from registration data are highly accurate in reproducing the true individual-level behavioral parameters (group means).

Keywords: Elections; Voter Racial Turnout; Bloc Voting; Ecological Regression; Ecological Inference (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2009
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0049124109334794 (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:sae:somere:v:37:y:2009:i:4:p:599-617

DOI: 10.1177/0049124109334794

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Sociological Methods & Research
Bibliographic data for series maintained by SAGE Publications ().