Unlocking the Aggregate Data Past—Which Key Fits?

Historical Methods

Volumn 34, Issue 4, 2001, Pages 159-169

  Palmquist, Bradley ^a  

^a VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Aggregation; Ecological inference; Electoral data; Quantitative history

Indexed keywords

CENSUS; DOCUMENTARY SOURCE; HISTORICAL GEOGRAPHY; METHODOLOGY; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS;

EID: 0035710748     PISSN: 01615440     EISSN: 19401906     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/01615440109598979     Document Type: Article

References (22)

1. Achen, C. H., and W. P. Shively. 1995. Cross-level inference. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
2. Cho, W. K. T. 1998. Iff the assumption fits…: A comment on the King ecological inference solution. Political Analysis 7: 143-63.
3. Duncan, D. O., and B. Davis. 1953. An alternative to ecological correlation. American Sociological Review 18: 665-66.
4. Flanigan, W. H., and N. Zingale. 1985. Alchemist's gold: Inferring individual relationships from aggregate data. Social Science History 9: 71-92.
5. Freedman, D. A., S. P. Klein, M. Ostland, and M. R. Roberts. 1998. Review of A solution to the ecological inference problem. Journal of the American Statistical Association 93: 1518-22.
6. Freedman, D. A., S. P. Klein, J. Sacks, C. A. Smyth, and C. G. Everett. 1991. Ecological regression and voting rights. Evaluation Review 15: 673-711.
7. Goodman, L. 1953. Ecological regression and the behavior of individuals. American Sociological Review 18: 663-64.
8. Goodman, L. 1959. Some alternatives to ecological correlation. American Journal of Sociology 64: 610-25.
9. Hanushek, E. A., J. E. Jackson, and J. F. Kain. 1974. Model specification, use of aggregate data, and the ecological correlation fallacy. Political Methodology 1: 89-107.
10. King, G. 1997. A solution to the ecological inference problem: Reconstructing individual behavior from aggregate data. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.
11. King, G. 1999. The future of ecological inference research: A comment on Freedman et al. Journal of the American Statistical Association 94: 352-56.
12. Kousser, J. M. 1973. Ecological regression and analysis of past politics. Journal of Interdisciplinary History4: 237-62.
13. Kousser, J. M. 1986. Speculation or specification? A note on Flanigan and Zingale. Social Science History 10: 71-84.
14. Palmquist, B. 1993. Ecological inference, aggregate data analysis of U.S. elections, and the Socialist Party of America. Ph.D. diss. University of California at Berkeley.
15. Palmquist, B. 1994. Respecification approaches to ecological inference: A comparison of control variables and the quadratic model. Paper delivered at annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, New York.
16. Palmquist, B. 1997. Racial polarization in the southern electorate: Republican votes for Duke in Lousiana. Paper delivered at annual meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association, Chicago.
17. Rivers, D. 1998. A solution to the ecological inference problem: Reconstructing individual behavior from aggregate data. American Political Science Review 92: 442-43.
18. Robinson, W. S. 1950. Ecological correlations and the behavior of individuals. American Sociological Review 15: 351-57.
19. Shively, W. P. 1991. A general extension of the method of bounds, with special application to studies of electoral transition. Historical Methods24: 81-94.
20. Thomsen, S. 1987. Danish elections, 1920-1979: A logit approach to ecological analysis and inference. Arhus, Denmark: Politica.
21. Wanat, J. 1982. Most possible estimates and maximum likelihood estimates. Sociological Methods and Research 10: 452-62.
22. Wasserman, I. M., and D. R. Segal. 1973. Aggregation effects in the ecological study of presidential voting. American Journal of Political Science 17: 177-81.