Modeling preference changes via a Hidden Markov item response theory model

Handbook of Markov Chain Monte Carlo

Volumn , Issue , 2011, Pages 479-492

  Park, Jong Hee ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84876069915     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: None     Document Type: Chapter

References (19)

1. Albert, J. H. 1992. Bayesian estimation of normal ogive item response curves using Gibbs sampling. Journal of Educational Statistics, 17:251-269
2. Albert, J. H. and Chib, S. 1993. Bayesian analysis of binary and polychotomous response data. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 88(422):669-679
3. Bafumi, J., Gelman, A., Park, D. K., and Kaplan, N. 2005. Practical issues in implementing and understanding Bayesian ideal point estimation. Political Analysis, 13(2):171-187
4. Bailey, M. and Chang, K. 2001. Comparing presidents, senators, and justices: Interinstitutional preference estimation. Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, 17(2):477-506
5. Chib, S. 1998. Estimation and comparison of multiple change-point models. Journal of Econometrics, 86(2):221-241
6. Clinton, J., Jackman, S., and Rivers, D. 2000. The statistical analysis of legislative behavior: A unified approach. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Political Methodology Society
7. Epstein, L. and Knight, J. 1998. The Choices Justices Make. CQ Press, Washington, D.C
8. Epstein, L. and Walker, T. G. 2007. Constitutional Law for a Changing America: Institutional Powers and Constraints. CQ Press, Washington, DC
9. Epstein, L., Hoekstra, V., Segal, J. A., and Spaeth, H. J. 1998. Do political preferences change? A longitudinal study of U.S. Supreme Court justices. Journal of Politics, 60(3):801-818
10. Heckman, J. J. and Snyder, J. M. 1997. Linear probability models of the demand for attributes with an empirical application to estimating the preferences of legislators. Rand Journal of Economics, 28:142-189
11. Ho, D. E. and Quinn, K. M. 2010. Did a switch in time save nine? Journal of Legal Analysis, 2(1):69-113
12. Jackman, S. 2001. Multidimensional analysis of roll call data via Bayesian simulation: Identification, estimation, inference and model checking. Political Analysis, 9:227-241
13. Johnson, V. E. and Albert, J. H. 1999. Ordinal Data Modeling. Springer, New York.
14. Londregan, J. 2000. Estimating legislators' preferred points. Political Analysis, 8(1):35-56
15. Martin, A. D. and Quinn, K. M. 2002. Dynamic ideal point estimation via Markov chain Monte Carlo for the U.S. Supreme Court, 1953-1999. Political Analysis, 10(2):134-153
16. Martin, A. D. and Quinn, K. M. 2007. Assessing preference change on the US Supreme Court. Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, 23(2):365-385
17. McCarty, N. M., Poole, K. T., and Rosenthal, H. 1997. Income Redistribution and the Realignment of American Politics. AEI Press, Washington, DC
18. Poole, K. T. and Rosenthal, H. 1997. Congress: A Political-Economic History of Roll-Call Voting. Oxford University Press, Oxford
19. Segal, J. A. and Spaeth, H. J. 1993. The Supreme Court and the Attitudinal Model. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge