Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
×
Home

Coder Reliability and Misclassification in the Human Coding of Party Manifestos

  • Slava Mikhaylov (a1), Michael Laver (a2) and Kenneth R. Benoit (a3)
Abstract

The Comparative Manifesto Project (CMP) provides the only time series of estimated party policy positions in political science and has been extensively used in a wide variety of applications. Recent work (e.g., Benoit, Laver, and Mikhaylov 2009; Klingemann et al. 2006) focuses on nonsystematic sources of error in these estimates that arise from the text generation process. Our concern here, by contrast, is with error that arises during the text coding process since nearly all manifestos are coded only once by a single coder. First, we discuss reliability and misclassification in the context of hand-coded content analysis methods. Second, we report results of a coding experiment that used trained human coders to code sample manifestos provided by the CMP, allowing us to estimate the reliability of both coders and coding categories. Third, we compare our test codings to the published CMP “gold standard” codings of the test documents to assess accuracy and produce empirical estimates of a misclassification matrix for each coding category. Finally, we demonstrate the effect of coding misclassification on the CMP's most widely used index, its left-right scale. Our findings indicate that misclassification is a serious and systemic problem with the current CMP data set and coding process, suggesting the CMP scheme should be significantly simplified to address reliability issues.

    • Send article to Kindle

      To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

      Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

      Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

      Coder Reliability and Misclassification in the Human Coding of Party Manifestos
      Available formats
      ×
      Send article to Dropbox

      To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

      Coder Reliability and Misclassification in the Human Coding of Party Manifestos
      Available formats
      ×
      Send article to Google Drive

      To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

      Coder Reliability and Misclassification in the Human Coding of Party Manifestos
      Available formats
      ×
Copyright
This is an Open-Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Corresponding author
e-mail: v.mikhaylov@ucl.ac.uk (corresponding author)
Footnotes
Hide All

Authors' note: Previously presented at the 66th MPSA Annual National Conference, Palmer House Hilton Hotel and Towers, April 3–6, 2008. Our heartfelt thanks goes out to all the volunteer test coders who completed the online coder tests used in the research for this paper. We also thank Andrea Volkens for cooperation and assistance with details of the coding process, and Jouni Kuha, Michael McDonald, Michael Peress, Sven-Oliver Proksch, Jonathan Slapin for useful comments. For replication data and code, see. Supplementary materials for this article are available on the Political Analysis Web site.

Footnotes
References
Hide All
Agresti, A. 1996. An introduction to categorical data analysis. New York: Wiley.
Benoit, Kenneth, Laver, Michael, and Mikhaylov, Slava. 2009. Treating words as data with error: Uncertainty in text statements of policy positions. American Journal of Political Science 53: 495513.
Bross, I. 1954. Misclassification in 2 × 2 tables. Biometrics 10: 488–95.
Budge, Ian, Klingemann, Hans-Dieter, Volkens, Andrea, Bara, Judith, and Tanenbaum, Eric. 2001. Mapping policy preferences: Estimates for parties, electors, and governments 1945-1998. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Cohen, J. 1960. A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educational and Psychological Measurement 20(1): 37.
Fleiss, J. L. 1971. Measuring nominal scale agreement among many raters. Psychological Bulletin 76: 378–82.
Fleiss, Joseph L., Levin, B., and Paik, M. C. 2003. Statistical methods for rates and proportions. 3rd ed. New York: John Wiley.
Hayes, A. F., and Krippendorff, K. 2007. Answering the call for a standard reliability measure for coding Data. Communication Methods and Measures 1: 77.
Heise, D. R. 1969. Separating reliability and stability in test-retest correlation. American Sociological Review 34: 93101.
Hopkins, Daniel, and King, Gary. 2010. A method of automated nonparametric content analysis for social science. American Journal of Political Science 54: 229–47.
King, G., and Lu, Y. 2008. Verbal autopsy methods with multiple causes of death. Statistical Science 23(1): 7891.
Klingemann, Hans-Dieter, Volkens, Andrea, Bara, Judith, Budge, Ian, and McDonald, Michael. 2006. Mapping policy preferences II: Estimates for parties, electors, and governments in eastern Europe, European Union and OECD 1990-2003. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Krippendorff, Klaus. 2004. Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology. 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Kuha, Jouni, and Skinner, Chris. 1997. Categorical data analysis and misclassification. In Survey measurement and process quality, eds. Lyberg, Lars E., Biemer, Paul, Collins, Martin, De Leeuw, Edith D., Dippo, Cathryn, Schwarz, Norbert, and Trewin, Dennis. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Kuha, Juni, Skinner, C., and Palmgren, J. 2000. Misclassification error. In Encyclopedia of epidemiologic methods, eds. Gail, M. and Benichou, J., 578–85. New York: Wiley.
Landis, J. R., and Koch, G. G. 1977. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 33: 159–74.
Laver, Michael, Benoit, Kenneth, and Garry, John. 2003. Estimating the policy positions of political actors using words as data. American Political Science Review 97: 311–31.
McDonald, Michael, and Mendes, Silvia. 2001. Checking the party policy estimates: Convergent validity. In Mapping policy preferences: Estimates for parties, electors, and governments 1945-1998, eds. Budge, Ian, Klingemann, Hans-Dieter, Volkens, Andrea, Bara, Judith, and Tanenbaum, Eric. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Mikhaylov, Slava, Laver, Michael, and Benoit, Kenneth. 2011. Replication data for: Coder reliability and misclassification in the human coding of party manifestos. http://hdl.handle.net/1902.1/16863UNF:5:/DiFWifTzUKbX0eH64QF9g==IQSS Dataverse Network [Distributor] V1 [Version].
Roberts, Chris. 2008. Modelling patterns of agreement for nominal scales. Statistics in Medicine 27: 810–30.
Rogan, W. J., and Gladen, B. 1978. Estimating prevalence from the results of a screening test. American Journal of Epidemiology 107: 71–6.
Slapin, J. B., and Proksch, S.-O. 2008. A scaling model for estimating time-series party positions from texts. American Journal of Political Science 52: 705–22.
Volkens, Andrea. 2001a. Manifesto research since 1979: From reliability to validity. In Estimating the policy positions of political actors, ed. Laver, Michael, 3349. London: Routledge.
Volkens, Andrea. 2001b. Quantifying the election programmes: Coding procedures and controls. In Mapping policy preferences: parties, electors and gGovernments: 1945-1998: Estimates for parties, electors and governments 1945-1998, eds. Budge, Ian, Klingemann, Hans-Dieter, Volkens, Andrea, Bara, Judith, Tannenbaum, Eric, Fording, Richard, Hearl, Derek, Min Kim, Hee, McDonald, Michael, and Mendes, Silvia. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Volkens, Andrea. 2007. Strengths and weaknesses of approaches to measuring policy positions of parties. Electoral Studies 26: 108120.
Wüst, Andreas M., and Volkens, Andrea. 2003. Euromanifesto Coding Instructions. Mannheim, Germany: Mannheimer Zentrum für Europäische Sozialforschung.
Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

Political Analysis
  • ISSN: 1047-1987
  • EISSN: 1476-4989
  • URL: /core/journals/political-analysis
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×
MathJax
Type Description Title
PDF
Supplementary materials

Mikhaylov et al. supplementary material
Supplementary Material 2

 PDF (61 KB)
61 KB
UNKNOWN
Supplementary materials

Mikhaylov et al. supplementary material
Supplementary Material 1

 Unknown (12 KB)
12 KB

Metrics

Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed