Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorTeorell, Jan
dc.contributor.authorLindstedt, Catharina
dc.date.accessioned2015-05-26T15:50:24Z
dc.date.available2015-05-26T15:50:24Z
dc.date.issued2009-05
dc.identifier.issn1653-8919
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/2077/39119
dc.description.abstractIn this paper we compare and assess four freely available cross-sectional time-series data sets in terms of their information on the ballot structure, district structure and formula of the electoral system in use for lower house and, if relevant, upper house and presidential elections. The four datasets evaluated are Golder (2005), the Database of Political Institutions (Beck et al. 2001; Keefer 2005), Persson and Tabellini (2003) and Johnson and Wallack (2006). We find that the choice of data source matters for conclusions drawn on the consequences of electoral systems for both party systems and corruption, but that no data source can be given prominence over the other on methodological grounds. Students of electoral systems must thus, in the future, make their results sensitive to the choice of data source.sv
dc.language.isoengsv
dc.relation.ispartofseriesWorking Paperssv
dc.relation.ispartofseries2009:09sv
dc.relation.urihttp://qog.pol.gu.se/digitalAssets/1350/1350691_2009_9_teorell_lindstedt.pdfsv
dc.subjectelectoral systemssv
dc.subjectdata evaluationsv
dc.subjectparty systemssv
dc.subjectcorruptionsv
dc.titleElectoral Systems: Assessing the Cross-Sectional Time-Series Data Sourcessv
dc.typeTextsv
dc.contributor.organizationQoG Institutesv


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record