Interpersonally incomparable responses pose a significant problem for survey researchers. If the manifest responses of individuals differ from their underlying true responses by monotonic transformations which vary from person to person, then the covariances of the manifest responses tools such as factor analysis may yield incorrect results. Satisfactory results for interpersonally incomparable ordinal responses can be obtained by assuming that rankings are based upon a set of multivariate normal latent variables which satisfy the factor or ideal point models of choice. Two statistical methods based upon these assumptions are described; their statistical properties are explored; and their computational feasibility is demonstrated in some simulations. We conclude that is possible to develop methods for factor and ideal point analysis of interpersonally incomparable ordinal data.

The properties of nonmetric multidimensional scaling (NMDS) are explored by specifying statistical models, proving statistical consistency, and developing hypothesis testing procedures. Statistical models with errors in the dependent and independent variables are described for quantitative and qualitative data. For these models, statistical consistency often depends crucially upon how error enters the model and how data are collected and summarized (e.g., by means, medians, or rank statistics). A maximum likelihood estimator for NMDS is developed, and its relationship to the standard Shepard-Kruskal estimation method is described. This maximum likelihood framework is used to develop a method for testing the overall fit of the model.

Both qualitative and quantitative research routinely fall short, producing misleading causal inferences. Because these weaknesses are in part different, we are convinced that multimethod strategies are productive. Each approach can provide additional leverage that helps address shortcomings of the other. This position is quite distinct from that of Beck, who believes that the two types of analysis cannot be adjoined. We review examples of adjoining that Beck dismisses, based on what we see as his outdated view of qualitative methods. By contrast, we show that these examples demonstrate how qualitative and quantitative analysis can work together.

The discussion of qualitative and quantitative research methods in political science has followed a “long arc of development,” according to Andrew Bennett (this symposium). He sees our book Rethinking Social Inquiry: Diverse Tools, Standards (RSI) as a “key turning point” in this development and as contributing to a more pluralistic vision of methodology. We would certainly be gratified if we have indeed made this contribution. Yet this is an ongoing discussion, and this symposium points to fruitful directions this discussion can take.

Two dynamic rational choice models of primaries are analyzed that demonstrate both reformers and their critics are right about primaries. Primaries can provide public instruction and a better informed electorate, and they can be poorly designed lotteries: A “recognition” and learning model describes how changing media coverage affects voters' knowledge about candidates and their subsequent voting behavior. A “strategic” voting model describes the dynamic implications of strategic voting and “horse-race” coverage by the media. We find that the recognition model has the normatively appealing dynamic of information leading to broadly self-interested outcomes while the strategy model has the unappealing behavior of a lottery the odds of which are fixed by the media's harsh judgments of who's winning and who's losing.

In coming to these conclusions, this paper illustrates a number of methodological points such as the usefulness of macromodels based upon assumptions about individual behavior, the analysis of macromodels using methods from electrical engineering, the strengths and limitations of analytical results versus simulations for understanding dynamic models, and the use of “ideal type” recognition and strategic voting models to clarify the systemic consequences of individual risk aversion and strategic voting. More generally, the paper shows how models can be used as narratives or parables for organizing disparate observations, refining our intuitions, and directing our research efforts.

This article describes a computationally simple, statistically consistent, reasonably efficient, and statistically informative generalized least squares (GLS) estimator for a general class of nonlinear, multidimensional scaling (MDS) models including the “ideal-point” models of voters' and legislators' behavior proposed by Melvin Hinich, Keith Poole, and others. Unlike other methods, the method described in this article provides a statistical framework for testing a wide range of hypotheses about these models including their functional form, their dimensionality, and the values of specific parameters. The Hinich ideal-point model is estimated using this method. It fits the data remarkably well compared to a standard factor analysis model that does not provide a reasonable fit to the data. This has the substantive implication of suggesting that voters base their voting decisions upon ideal-point dimensions like liberalism-conservatism and not upon factor analysis dimensions like competence and leadership.

Experimental approaches to political science research have become increasingly prominent in the discipline. Experimental research is regularly featured in some of the discipline’s top journals, and indeed in 2014 a new Journal of Experimental Political Science was created, published by Cambridge University Press. At the same time, there are disagreements among political scientists about the limits of experimental research, the ethical challenges associated with this research, and the general model of social scientific inquiry underlying much experimental research. Field Experiments and Their Critics: Essays on the Uses and Abuses of Experimentation in the Social Sciences, edited by Dawn Langan Teele (Yale University Press 2015), brings together many interesting perspectives on these issues. And so we have invited a number of political scientists to comment on the book, the issues it raises, and the more general question of “the uses and abuses of experimentation in the social sciences.”

This article documents the prevalence in organized interest politics in the United States of organizations—for example, corporations, think tanks, universities, or hospitals—that have no members in the ordinary sense and analyzes the consequences of that dominance for the democratic representation of citizen interests. We use data from the Washington Representatives Study, a longitudinal data base containing more than 33,000 organizations active in national politics in 1981, 1991, 2001, 2006, and 2011. The share of membership associations active in Washington has eroded over time until, in 2011, barely a quarter of the more than 14,000 organizations active in Washington in 2011 were membership associations, and less than half of those were membership association with individuals as members. In contrast, a majority of the politically involved organizations were memberless organizations, of which nearly two-thirds were corporations. The dominance of memberless organizations in pressure politics raises important questions about democratic representation. Studies of political representation by interest groups raise several concerns about democratic inequalities: the extent to which representation of interests by groups is unequal, the extent to which groups fail to represent their members equally, and the extent to which group members are unable to control their leaders. All of the dilemmas that arise when membership associations advocate in politics become even more intractable when organizations do not have members.

Politics, economics, and technology have conspired to make this an exceptionally challenging time for American higher education. Some critics claim that costs are out of control in traditional public and private nonprofit higher education. They believe these institutions will soon go the way of the railroads as for-profit institutions displace them and the Internet replaces college campuses and classrooms. Other critics bemoan the privatization of higher education and the increasing role of market forces. Still others think higher education has lost its way and fails to focus on educating undergraduates.

Spatial diagrams of politics could and should be iconic for political science in much the same way as supply-and-demand curves are in economics. Many fundamental problems of political science can be connected with them, and many different concepts—such as ideological constraint, cross-pressures, framing, agenda-setting, political competition, voting systems, and party systems, to name just a few—can be illuminated through spatial diagrams. Spatial diagrams raise questions and provide insights. They suggest political maneuvers, possible realignments, and political problems. They provide us with revealing images that aid memory and facilitate analysis. They are a powerful way to think about politics, and we could not do better than to feature them in our textbooks, to use them in our research, and to exhibit them as our brand—as our distinctive way of thinking about how the world works

Could changing the locations of polling places affect the outcome of an election by increasing the costs of voting for some and decreasing them for others? The consolidation of voting precincts in Los Angeles County during California's 2003 gubernatorial recall election provides a natural experiment for studying how changing polling places influences voter turnout. Overall turnout decreased by a substantial 1.85 percentage points: A drop in polling place turnout of 3.03 percentage points was partially offset by an increase in absentee voting of 1.18 percentage points. Both transportation and search costs caused these changes. Although there is no evidence that the Los Angeles Registrar of Voters changed more polling locations for those registered with one party than for those registered with another, the changing of polling places still had a small partisan effect because those registered as Democrats were more sensitive to changes in costs than those registered as Republicans. The effects were small enough to allay worries about significant electoral consequences in this instance (e.g., the partisan effect might be decisive in only about one in two hundred contested House elections), but large enough to make it possible for someone to affect outcomes by more extensive manipulation of polling place locations.

What is the impact of the possibility of political participation on the Internet on long-standing patterns of participatory inequality in American politics? An August 2008 representative survey of Americans conducted by the Pew Internet and American Life Project provides little evidence that there has been any change in the extent to which political participation is stratified by socio-economic status, but it suggests that the web has ameliorated the well-known participatory deficit among those who have just joined the electorate. Even when only that subset of the population with Internet access is considered, participatory acts such as contributing to candidates, contacting officials, signing a political petition, or communicating with political groups are as stratified socio-economically when done on the web as when done offline. The story is different for stratification by age where historically younger people have been less engaged than older people in most forms of political participation. Young adults are much more likely than their elders to be comfortable with electronic technologies and to use the Internet, but among Internet users, the young are not especially politically active. How these trends play out in the future depends on what happens to the current Web-savvy younger generation and the cohorts that follow and on the rapidly developing political capacities of the Web. Stay logged on …

Political participation has long been a puzzle for political science analysis. The logic of collective action suggests that activity to achieve collective goals is irrational; yet citizens are active. In this article, we approach the subject from the point of view of political activists, using survey data to consider their own interpretations of why they took part. The data show that participants recall many gratifications from their activity and that the patterns differ substantially across modes of participation. These rewards tend to be ‘political’ in that activists cite both civic gratifications and the desire to achieve collective goals more frequently than would be expected on the basis of rational choice approaches. The variations among acts with respect to the nature of the retrospective interpretations of the rewards they provide – in conjunction with open-ended responses about the issues behind activity – lend credence to respondents' accounts. The results call into question the applicability of narrow rational choice approaches to political activity.

Citizens do not choose sides on issues like busing or abortion whimsically. They have reasons for their preferences – certainly they can give reasons for them. But how is this possible? Citizens as a rule pay little attention to politics, indeed take only a modest interest in it even during election campaigns when their interest in politics is at its height. And since they pay little attention to politics, it is hardly surprising that they know little about it. Many, in fact, are quite ignorant of basic facts of political life – such as the identity of the party that controls Congress or indeed the name of the congressman who represents them. Which, of course, raises a question of some interest: how do citizens figure out what they think about political issues, given how little they commonly know about them?

With its mission broadening and budgets tightening, APSA has continued to operate efficiently and responsibly, and fiscal year 2004 ended within budget and with a growth in net value. In the fall of 2003, the Council made the decision to approve a deficit budget of $43,000. This planned deficit allowed the Association to tap into its reserves to implement an extensive technology plan that included transforming the APSA web site and upgrading the headquarters' aging cabling and network infrastructure. APSA accomplished these projects—and a number of others—and managed to finish the year ahead of budgeted costs, with a deficit of less than $2,000 from programmatic and general operating activities. APSA also ended the year with a significant increase in its net assets.

Every close election leads to speculation about what might have happened if events had gone another way, if the candidates had performed differently, or if the voters had been presented with other arguments and appeals. But the presidential election of November 2000 raised an entirely new set of counterfactual possibilities that had escaped notice in the past: suppose voting systems worked better, suppose felons were allowed to vote in more states, suppose registration were easier, suppose absentee ballots were counted differently? Before November 2000, these questions about the details of American electoral machinery were mostly ignored, but they mattered a great deal in 2000. The articles in this symposium explore the implications of the basic rules and the performance of the machinery of American politics.In “Equal Protection for Votes” (in The Longest Night: Polemics and Perspectives on Election 2000) Brady argued that the enduring legacy of Bush v. Gore would be a concern with the poor performance of voting systems. In “Postpoing the California Recall to Protect Voting Rights” (2004), Brady recounted his experience with a California lawsuit that argued for postponing a gubernatorial recall until better voting systems could be put in place. Thanks to the authors of these symposium articles for their patience and hard work.

“Two Paths to a Science of Politics” presents two strongly argued points of view about where we should be going in our discipline. The authors by and large agree on the nature of science and the variety of ways to do it, but they disagree on the most fruitful way to proceed at this moment. Granato and Scioli believe that we need to do more to test theories with data and to formulate theories that are based on data. We need, in their phrase, to consider the empirical implications of theoretical models (EITM). Rogers Smith thinks we need to take history, context, and meaning more seriously in order to understand phenomena such as political identity.Henry E. Brady's co-edited book with David Collier, Rethinking Social Inquiry: Diverse Tools, Shared Standards, will be published this year from Rowman and Littlefield and Berkeley Public Policy Press. His thanks to David Collier, Gary King, Paul Sniderman, and the editorial staff of Perspectives on Politics for their helpful comments.