Essays on the statistical analysis of roll-call votes and judicial citations
Abstract/Contents
- Abstract
- This dissertation consists of one chapter exploring the statistical properties of idealpoint estimators and two chapters exploring the use of judicial citations to extend ideal-point estimation and advance our understanding of judicial opinions. Chapter one explores the statistical properties of ideal-point estimators. This chapter provides several theoretical results regarding ideal-point estimation. First, this chapter demonstrates a counterexample to consistency of common ideal-point estimators--even with regard to the rank of the ideal points. It then presents a simple estimator of the rank of unidimensional ideal points that is inefficient but also consistent for a generalization of most common ideal-point models. Chapter two--joint work with Robert Anderson and Stephen Jessee--introduces a method for estimating the ideology of judges and court cases based on the citations contained in judicial opinions that can directly estimate the ideological positions of cases from citations to precedent without using the votes in those cases. This chapter then uses this technique to address two important questions in judicial politics. The first regards whose ideology is reflected in a majority opinion. The second question focuses on the Supreme Court's decision to grant certiorari. The technique introduced in this chapter allows us to investigate previously untestable hypotheses regarding the relationship between the decision to grant certiorari and the lower court's opinion in the case. Chapter three uses judicial citation data for a different purpose--categorizing opinions. Citations explicitly link each opinion to other opinions--including the opinions of other courts--and legal documents. This chapter introduces a statistical model that assumes opinions are more likely to cite other opinions that deal with similar issues and allows issue areas to form a hierarchical structure. The results are analyzed to understand the relationship between different issue areas as well as changes in the Court's agenda over time. I also compare the results to a traditional hand-coding of these opinions.
Description
| Type of resource | text |
|---|---|
| Form | electronic; electronic resource; remote |
| Extent | 1 online resource. |
| Publication date | 2010 |
| Issuance | monographic |
| Language | English |
Creators/Contributors
| Associated with | Tahk, Alexander Moss |
|---|---|
| Associated with | Stanford University, Department of Political Science. |
| Primary advisor | Jackman, Simon, 1966- |
| Thesis advisor | Jackman, Simon, 1966- |
| Thesis advisor | Ferejohn, John A |
| Thesis advisor | Quinn, Kevin M |
| Thesis advisor | Krosnick, Jon A |
| Advisor | Ferejohn, John A |
| Advisor | Quinn, Kevin M |
| Advisor | Krosnick, Jon A |
Subjects
| Genre | Theses |
|---|
Bibliographic information
| Statement of responsibility | Alexander Moss Tahk. |
|---|---|
| Note | Submitted to the Department of Political Science. |
| Thesis | Ph.D. Stanford University 2010 |
| Location | electronic resource |
Access conditions
- Copyright
- © 2010 by Alexander Moss Tahk
Also listed in
Loading usage metrics...