Comparar métodos
Revisa los métodos seleccionados uno junto a otro; las filas que difieren aparecen resaltadas.
| Manifesto Coding× | Expert Survey× | |
|---|---|---|
| Campo | Political Science | Political Science |
| Familia | Process / pipeline | Process / pipeline |
| Año de origen≠ | 2001 | — |
| Autor original≠ | Manifesto Research Group / Comparative Manifesto Project (CMP/MARPOR) | Comparative party-positioning research (Castles & Mair; Chapel Hill team) |
| Tipo≠ | Quantitative content analysis of party manifestos | Survey of subject-matter experts to measure latent positions |
| Fuente seminal≠ | Budge, I., Klingemann, H.-D., Volkens, A., Bara, J., & Tanenbaum, E. (2001). Mapping Policy Preferences: Estimates for Parties, Electors, and Governments 1945–1998. Oxford: Oxford University Press. ISBN: 9780199244003 | Bakker, R., de Vries, C., Edwards, E., Hooghe, L., Jolly, S., Marks, G., Polk, J., Rovny, J., Steenbergen, M., & Vachudova, M. A. (2015). Measuring Party Positions in Europe: The Chapel Hill Expert Survey Trend File, 1999–2010. Party Politics, 21(1), 143–152. DOI ↗ |
| Alias | CMP coding, MARPOR coding, Manifesto content analysis, Party manifesto coding | Expert judgment survey, Party expert survey, Chapel Hill Expert Survey, Expert placement survey |
| Relacionados | 4 | 4 |
| Resumen≠ | Manifesto coding is the quantitative content-analysis methodology of the Comparative Manifesto Project (CMP/MARPOR) for measuring parties' policy preferences from their election manifestos. Trained coders break each manifesto into quasi-sentences and assign every unit to one of a fixed set of policy categories. Counting how often each category appears yields salience measures, and combining pro- and anti- categories produces position scores such as the left–right RILE index, giving comparable estimates of party positions across more than fifty democracies since 1945. | An expert survey measures latent political quantities — most often parties' positions on policy dimensions — by asking a panel of country and subject-matter experts to place the objects of interest on structured numerical scales. Averaging many experts' judgments yields position estimates, while the spread across experts provides a built-in measure of uncertainty and reliability. The Chapel Hill Expert Survey is the leading example, producing comparable measures of European parties' positions on ideology, European integration, and many specific issues over time. |
| ScholarGateConjunto de datos ↗ |
|
|