When experts disagree: response aggregation and its consequences in expert surveys

R. Lindstädt, S.-O. Proksch, J.B. Slapin

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

8 Citations (Scopus)
120 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Political scientists use expert surveys to assess the latent features of political actors. Experts, though, are unlikely to be equally informed and assess all actors equally well. The literature acknowledges variance in measurement quality but pays little attention to the implications of uncertainty for aggregating responses. We discuss the nature of the measurement problem in expert surveys. We then propose methods to assess the ability of experts to judge where actors stand and to aggregate expert responses. We examine the effects of aggregation for a prominent survey in the literature on party politics and EU integration. Using a Monte Carlo simulation, we demonstrate that it is better to aggregate expert responses using the median or modal response, rather than the mean.
Original languageEnglish
JournalPolitical Science Research and Methods
Early online date16 Nov 2018
DOIs
Publication statusE-pub ahead of print - 16 Nov 2018

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'When experts disagree: response aggregation and its consequences in expert surveys'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this