Assessing the dimensionality of politics: A comment on brechtel and kaiser

Political Science

Volumn 51, Issue 1, 1999, Pages 27-31

  Nagel, Jack H ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84992817963     PISSN: 00323187     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/003231879905100102     Document Type: Article

References (9)

1. ‘Party System and Coalition Formation in Post-Reform New Zealand’, Political Science, Vol. 51 (July 1999), pp. 3–26.
2. Jack H. Nagel, ‘How Many Parties Will New Zealand Have under MMP?’ Political Science, Vol. 46 (December 1994), pp. 139–60.
3. Hans-Dieter Klingemann and Andrea Volkens, ‘Coalition Governments in the Federal Republic of Germany: Does Policy Matter?’ in M.J. Laver and Ian Budge (eds.), Party Policy and Government Coalitions (New York, 1992), pp. 189–212.
4. Jack H. Nagel, ‘Populism, Heresthetics, and Political Stability: Richard Seddon and the Art of Majority Rule’, British Journal of Political Science, Vol. 23 (1993), pp. 139–74.
5. E.g., William H. Riker, ‘Political Theory and the Art of Heresthetics’, in Ada W. Finifter (ed.), Political Science: The State of the Discipline (Washington, 1983).
6. John Huber and Ronald Inglehart, ‘Expert Interpretations of Party Space and Party Locations in 42 Societies’, Party Politics, Vol. 1 (1995), p. 91.
7. Francis G. Castles and Peter Mair, ‘Left-Right Political Scales: Some “Expert” Judgments’, European Journal o f Political Research, Vol. 12 (1984), p. 75. Another improvement introduced by Brechtel and Kaiser is their question 1.1, which allows respondents to rate the importance of the main policy scale.
8. Kenneth Koford makes this point in his critique of Poole and Rosenthal's dimensional analysis of roll-call votes, in ‘Dimensions in Congressional Voting’, American Political Science Review, Vol. 83 (1989), p. 950.
9. Jack H. Nagel, ‘Social Choice in a Pluralitarian Democracy: The Politics of Market Liberalization in New Zealand’, British Journal of Political Science, Vol. 28 (1998), pp. 223–67.