Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-p2v8j Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-12T10:13:04.603Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Measuring Media Freedom: An Item Response Theory Analysis of Existing Indicators

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 June 2020

Jonathan A. Solis Open the ORCID record for Jonathan A. Solis [Opens in a new window]  and
Philip D. Waggoner Open the ORCID record for Philip D. Waggoner [Opens in a new window]
Jonathan A. Solis*
Affiliation:
College of William and Mary, Williamsburg, VA, USA
Philip D. Waggoner
Affiliation:
University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA
*
*Corresponding author. E-mail: jsolis@aiddata.wm.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The media's ability to freely gather and disseminate information remains a critical aspect of democracy. Studies link media freedom to other concepts including human rights, corruption, democratic peace and conflict, natural resource wealth, political knowledge and foreign aid. However, media freedom's many facets make it difficult for any single index to fully capture. To develop a more robust measure, this article treats media freedom as a latent variable and analyzes ten extant indicators by fitting an item response theory model. Utilizing a Bayesian approach, the model generates time-series, cross-sectional data on a bounded, unidimensional scale from 0 to 1 that measures media freedom in 197 countries from 1948 to 2017. After numerous validity checks, the authors utilize their new Media System Freedom data to replicate Egorov, Guriev and Sonin's (2009) analysis of media freedom and natural resource wealth. The findings indicate that the published results do not hold once the more robust measure is included.

Keywords

media freedommeasurementitem response theory (IRT) modellatent variable analysiscomparative analysispolitical communication
Type
Article
Information
British Journal of Political Science , Volume 51 , Issue 4 , October 2021 , pp. 1685 - 1704
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s) 2020. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Becker, LB, Vlad, T and Nusser, N (2007) An evaluation of press freedom indicators. International Communication Gazette 69(1), 5–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Besley, T and Burgess, R (2001) Political agency, government responsiveness and the role of the media. European Economic Review 45(4), 629–640.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Besley, T and Prat, A (2006) Handcuffs for the grabbing hand? Media capture and government accountability. The American Economic Review 96(3), 720–736.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bimber, B (2002) Information and American Democracy: Technology in the Evolution of Political Power. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Brunetti, A and Weder, B (2003) A free press is bad news for corruption. Journal of Public Economics 87(7), 1801–1824.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bueno De Mesquita, B and Downs, GW (2005) Development and democracy. Foreign Affairs 84(5), 77–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cheibub, JA, Gandhi, J and Vreeland, JR (2010) Democracy and dictatorship revisited. Public Choice 143(1–2), 67–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coppedge, M et al. (2018a) V-Dem [Country-Year/Country-Date] Dataset v8. Varieties of Democracy (V-Dem) Project.Google Scholar
Coppedge, M et al. (2018b) V-Dem Country Coding Units. Varieties of Democracy (V-Dem) Project.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dahl, RA (1971) Polyarchy: Participation and Opposition. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Dahl, RA (1989) Democracy and its Critics. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Djankov, S et al. (2003) Who owns the media? The Journal of Law and Economics 46(2), 341–382.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Donohue, GA, Tichenor, PJ and Olien, CN (1995) A guard dog perspective on the role of media. Journal of Communication 45(2), 115–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dutta, N and Roy, S (2009) The impact of foreign direct investment on press freedom. Kyklos 62(2), 239–257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dutta, N and Williamson, CR (2016) Can foreign aid free the press? Journal of Institutional Economics 12(3), 603–621.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Egorov, G, Guriev, S and Sonin, K (2009) Why resource-poor dictators allow freer media: a theory and evidence from panel data. American Political Science Review 103(4), 645–668.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fariss, CJ (2014) Respect for human rights has improved over time: modeling the changing standard of accountability. American Political Science Review 108(2), 297–318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Freedom House (2017) Freedom of the Press Dataset. Available from https://freedomhouse.org/report-types/freedom-world.Google Scholar
Freille, S, Emranul Haque, M and Kneller, R (2007) A contribution to the empirics of press freedom and corruption. European Journal of Political Economy 23, 838–862.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gentzkow, M and Shapiro, JM (2008) Competition and truth in the market for news. The Journal of Economic Perspectives 22(2), 133–154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hervieu, B (2013) The Country of Thirty Berlusconis. Available from https://rsf.org/en/reports/brazil-country-thirty-berlusconis.Google Scholar
Kalenborn, C and Lessmann, C (2013) The impact of democracy and press freedom on corruption: conditionality matters. Journal of Policy Modeling 35(6), 857–886.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kellam, M and Stein, EA (2016) Silencing critics: why and how presidents restrict media freedom in democracies. Comparative Political Studies 49(1), 36–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
King, G, Pan, J and Roberts, ME (2013) How censorship in China allows government criticism but silences collective expression. American Political Science Review 107(02), 326–343.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lawson, CH (2002) Building the Fourth Estate: Democratization and the Rise of a Free Press in Mexico. Berkley: University of California Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lesson, PT (2008) Media freedom, political knowledge, and participation. The Journal of Economic Perspectives 22(2), 155–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Linzer, DA and Staton, JK (2015) A global measure of judicial independence, 1948–2012. Journal of Law and Courts 3(2), 223–256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lord, FM (1980) Applications of Item Response Theory to Practical Testing Problems. Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
Lorentzen, P (2014) China's strategic censorship. American Journal of Political Science 58(2), 402–414.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lowenstein, RL (1970) Press freedom as a political indicator. In Fischer, HD and Merrill, JC (eds), International Communication, Media, Channels, Functions. New York: Hastings House, pp. 129–142.Google Scholar
Marshall, MG and Jaggers, K (2017) POLITY IV Project: Political Regime Characteristics and Transitions, 1800–2016 Dataset Users Manual. Available from http://www.systemicpeace.org/inscrdata.html.Google Scholar
McMann, KM et al. (2016) Strategies of Validation: Assessing the Varieties of Democracy Corruption Data. V-Dem Working Paper 23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McQuail, D (2010) McQuail's Mass Communication Theory: 6th Edition. Sage Publications.Google Scholar
Norris, P (2006) The role of the free press in promoting democratization, good governance and human development. In Harvey, M (ed.), Media Matters: Perspectives on Advancing Governance and Development, Global Forum for Media Development, Internews Europe, pp. 66–75.Google Scholar
Pemstein, D et al. (2018) The V-Dem Measurement Model: Latent Variable Analysis for Cross-National and Cross-Temporal Expert-Coded Data. University of Gothenburg, Varieties of Democracy Institute (Working Paper No. 21, 3d edition.).Google Scholar
Pemstein, D, Meserve, SA and Melton, J (2010) Democratic compromise: a latent aariable analysis of ten measures of regime type. Political Analysis 18(4), 426–449.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Petrova, M (2011) Newspapers and parties: how advertising revenues created an independent press. American Political Science Review 105(4), 790–808.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Picard, RG (1985) The Press and the Decline of Democracy: The Democratic Socialist Response in Public Policy, vol. 4. Westport, CT: Greenwood Publishing Group.Google Scholar
Price, ME (2002) Media and Sovereignty: The Global Information Revolution and Its Challenge to State Power. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Przeworski, A, et al. (2000) Democracy and Development: Political Institutions and Well-Being in the World, 1950–1990. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rasch, G (1960) Probabilistic Models for Some Intelligence and Attainment Tests. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Reporters Without Borders (2018) Press Freedom Index. Available from https://rsf.org/en/world-press-freedom-index.Google Scholar
Rizopoulos, D (2006) Ltm: an R package for latent variable modeling and item response theory analyses. Journal of Statistical Software 17(5), 1–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rozumilowicz, B (2002) Democratic change: a theoretical approach. In Price, ME, Rozumilowicz, B and Verhulst, S (eds), Media Reform. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Samejima, F (1968) Estimation of latent ability using a response pattern of graded scores. ETS Research Report Series 1968(1).Google Scholar
Samejima, F (1972) A general model for free-response data. Psychometrika Monograph Supplement No. 18.Google Scholar
Schedler, A (2002) The menu of manipulation. Journal of Democracy 13(3), 36–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schneider, L (2014) Media Freedom Indices. What They Tell Us–and What They Don't. Bonn: Deutsche Welle Akademie.Google Scholar
Schoonvelde, M (2014) Media freedom and the institutional underpinnings of political knowledge. Political Science Research and Methods 2(2), 163–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Siebert, FS, Peterson, T and Schramm, W (1956) Four Theories of the Press: The Authoritarian, Libertarian, Social Responsibility, and Soviet Communist Concepts of What the Press Should Be and Do. Champaign: University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
Solis, JA and Antenangeli, L (2017) Corruption is bad news for a free press: reassessing the relationship between Media freedom and corruption. Social Science Quarterly 98(3), 1112–1137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Solis, JA and Waggoner, PD (2020), “Replication Data for: Measuring Media Freedom: An Item Response Theory Analysis of Existing Indicators”, https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/ENOEQS, Harvard Dataverse, V1, UNF:6:+9yP9229dKGfxd7cfodz/w== [fileUNF]CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stanig, P (2015) Regulation of speech and media coverage of corruption: an empirical analysis of the Mexican press. American Journal of Political Science 59(1), 175–193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stier, S (2015) Democracy, autocracy and the news: the impact of regime type on media freedom. Democratization 22(7), 1273–1295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stier, S (2017) Political determinants of Media freedom new. In Tumber, H and Waisbord, S (eds), The Routledge Companion to Media and Human Rights. Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
Treier, S and Jackman, S (2008) Democracy as a latent variable. American Journal of Political Science 52(1), 201–217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Belle, DA (1997) Press freedom and the democratic peace. Journal of Peace Research 34(4), 405–414.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Belle, DA (2000) Press Freedom and Global Politics. Westport, CT: Greenwood Publishing Group.Google Scholar
Weaver, DH (1977) The press and government restriction: a cross-national study over time. Gazette (Leiden, Netherlands) 23(3), 152–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whitten-Woodring, J (2009) Watchdog or lapdog? Media freedom, regime type, and government respect for human rights. International Studies Quarterly 53(3), 595–625.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whitten-Woodring, J and Van Belle, DA (2017) The correlates of media freedom: an introduction of the global media freedom dataset. Political Science Research and Methods 5(1), 179–188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Windett, JH, Harden, JJ and Hall, ME (2015) Estimating dynamic ideal points for state supreme courts. Political Analysis 23(3), 461–469.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
World Bank (2017) World Development Indicators. Available from https://data.worldbank.org/data-catalog/world-development-indicators.Google Scholar
Supplementary material: Link

Solis and Waggoner Dataset

Dataset

https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/ENOEQS
Link
Supplementary material: PDF

Solis and Waggoner supplementary material

Solis and Waggoner supplementary material

Download Solis and Waggoner supplementary material(PDF)
PDF 2 MB